The Ninth Circuit has upheld a deportation order for Emerson Levi Godoy-Aguilar, a permanent resident, affirming the decision that his 2015 conviction under California state law for dissuading a witness matched a federal aggravated felony offense of obstruction of justice.

In a published opinion on Monday, U.S. Circuit Judge Carlos T. Bea ruled that Godoy-Aguilar's conviction for violating California Penal Code Section 136.1(c)(1), which prohibits knowingly and maliciously preventing a witness or victim from attending or giving testimony in a legal proceeding, was a "categorical match" to the generic federal offense of obstruction of justice under Section 101(a)(43)(S) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

Godoy-Aguilar, a native of El Salvador, entered the U.S. as a permanent resident in 2009. In 2015, he pleaded nolo contendere to the state charge of dissuading a witness by force or threat. He was sentenced to a year in Los Angeles County Jail.

Following the conviction, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security charged him with removability, alleging he had committed an aggravated felony under the INA. An immigration judge issued a removal order, which was upheld by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

Godoy-Aguilar challenged the BIA's decision, arguing that the California statute under which he was convicted was too broad to qualify as a match for the federal obstruction of justice offense. However, Judge Bea, writing for the three-judge panel, disagreed. He explained that in determining whether a state statute matches a federal offense, courts focus on whether the elements of the state offense align with the generic definition of the federal crime. In this case, Judge Bea concluded that none of the elements of the California offense "swept more broadly" than the federal offense.

Judge Bea emphasized that influencing or impeding a witness or potential witness — which is covered under federal obstruction of justice laws — includes preventing or dissuading a witness from testifying at a legal proceeding. He also noted that the mens rea requirement of "knowingly and maliciously" matched the specific intent required for a federal obstruction offense.

As a result, the Ninth Circuit denied Godoy-Aguilar's petition for review, confirming that his conviction qualified as an aggravated felony related to obstruction of justice.

The case, Emerson Godoy-Aguilar v. Merrick Garland, case number 19-70960, was heard before U.S. Circuit Judges Carlos T. Bea, Kenneth K. Lee, and Lucy H. Koh. Godoy-Aguilar is represented by David A. Lluis and Ramiro J. Lluis of Lluis Law, while the federal government is represented by attorneys from the U.S. Department of Justice, including Craig A. Newell Jr., Lindsay B. Glauner, Jennifer J. Keeney, and Joseph H. Hunt.