On appeal Mata-Guerrero argues that failure to register as a sex offender under Wisconsin law does not constitute a CIMT.The BIA relied on a precedential decision issued before Silva-Treviño under which it held that failure to register as a sex offender under California law was a CIMT. Mata-Guerrero v. Holder, No. 10-1664, slip op. at 5 (discussing Matter of Tobar-Lobo, 24 I&N Dec. 143 (2007)). “Relying on that case, the Board concluded that Mata-Guerrero’s conviction for failure to register was a crime of moral turpitude and therefore that Mata-Guerrero was ineligible for a section 212(c) waiver, even though Wisconsin Statute § 301.45(2)(a) contains no element of intent or even knowledge.”
The immigration judge determined that the failure to register conviction involves moral turpitude. In reaching this conclusion, the IJ “relied on the BIA’s decision in In re Tobar-Lobo, 24 I&N Dec. 143 (BIA 2007), whereby it concluded that failure to register as a sex offender in violation of California’s sex offender registration act was a crime involving moral turpitude.” Totimeh, Nos. 10-3939 & 11-1998, slip op. at 5.
Some background is appropriate. In a 2007 decision, Matter of Tobar-Lobo, 24 I&N Dec. 143 (BIA 2007), the Board held that California’s failure to register as a sex offender offense, Cal. Penal Code § 290(g)(1), categorically constitutes a CIMT. Pannu was convicted under the same provision.