Unites States Immigration Judge
Hon. Charles M. Honeyman
Philadelphia
Decision:
“Clearly the goods were stolen”. (Exhibit 2, Judgment: FBI Criminal Information). However nothing in the record outlines any fraudulent action by the Respondent (Kay). Although the securities were clearly obtained through fraud, there is no indication Respondent (Kay) played any role in obtaining the securities, or that he even knew they had been procured through fraud. (Exhibit 2, Presentence Investigation Report). Further, Respondent did not plead guilty as a conspirator or as aider and abetter or an accessory to those convicted of the initial fraud. Therefore as a matter of law, the act of the other defendants cannot be attributed to Respondent (Kay). In the guilty plea Respondent stated only that he received and possessed the securities. This alone does not unequivocally establish …that his act involve an element of fraud.Respondent will be removable for aggravated felony only if the Government could show Respondent was actively involved in fraudulently obtaining the securities and there is no such evidence in the record”
Conclusion:
“Accordingly Respondents motion to terminate shall be granted and these proceeding shall be dismissed”
AI
