answer the following question. | Homework Writing
Im trying to study for my Law course and I need some help to understand this question.
Week 3 – Sections 212 and 237 of the INA
This week we are reviewing the various grounds if inadmissibility and removability. Knowing whether section 212 or 237 applies to a given scenario is vital to a good understanding of how the law works. It is also important to know what method of analysis is needed when a crime involving moral turpitude may result in removal. With these concepts in mind, please discuss the following:
Harold entered and was admitted to the United States on a nonimmigrant B-2 visitor visa. After six months, his period of authorized stay expired. However, Harold did not depart the United States as required and remained in the United States in violation of the law. Harold had taken up residence in Phoenix, AZ. Within 3 months of his admission to the U.S., Harold was convicted of misdemeanor shoplifting and spent 15 days in the 4th Street Jail in Phoenix.
Assume for purposes of this question that the maximum sentence that could be imposed for shoplifting is one (1) year. Also assume that the crime of shoplifting is based on Arizona Revised Statute §13-805, which defines shoplifting as:
A person commits shoplifting if, while in an establishment in which merchandise is displayed for sale, the person knowingly obtains such goods of another with the intent to deprive that person of such goods by:
1. Removing any of the goods from the immediate display or from any other place within the establishment without paying the purchase price; or
2. Charging the purchase price of the goods to a fictitious person or any person without that person’s authority; or
3. Paying less than the purchase price of the goods by some trick or artifice such as altering, removing, substituting or otherwise disfiguring any label, price tag or marking; or
4. Transferring the goods from one container to another; or
5. Concealment.
Based on the above facts, answer the following questions, with explanation and analysis:
1. Is Harold is “removable” under §237, because he was admitted to the United States by immigration officials, but let his status lapse?
2. Is Harold’s conviction a crime involving moral turpitude under §237?
3. Is Harold’s “inadmissible” under §212 because his visa lapsed and he remained in the United States illegally?
4. Is Harold’s conviction a crime involving moral turpitude under §212?
