Safe Havens

INS regulations formerly defined the term “conviction” to mean “a conviction by a court of competent jurisdiction.”[298]  A convicting court’s lack of subject matter jurisdiction may therefore deprive a conviction of its validity for immigration purposes.[299]  The lack of jurisdiction of the criminal court to enter the conviction may be challenged in immigration proceedings.[300]

[298] Former 8 C.F.R. § 242.2(b).

[299] See, e.g., United States v. Ceja-Prado, 333 F.3d 1046 (9th Cir. June 25, 2003) (where proof of defendant’s age is lacking, and s/he may have been a juvenile at the time the crime was committed, there may be no federal jurisdiction over defendant’s case pursuant to the Federal Juvenile Delinquency Act, 18 U.S.C. § 5031); United States v. Gutierrez-Alba, 128 F.3d 1324 (9th Cir. 1997) (assuming without deciding that adult trial court lacked jurisdiction to convict juvenile defendant, but finding sufficient admission of disqualifying conduct).

[300] See N. Tooby, J. Rollin & J. Foster, Crimes of Moral Turpitude § § 10.9, 10.19 (2d ed. 2005).