How have we applied the modified categorical approach in determining whether a prior criminal conviction for a drug trafficking offence constitutes a "drug trafficking crime"?

We apply the modified categorical approach in this case because the definition of racketeering under Arizona law is divisible, and contains both offenses that would constitute racketeering under federal law, and offenses that would not. We have taken this approach with the Arizona racketeering statute in other contexts. See Lara-Chacon v. Ashcroft, 345 F.3d 1148, 1152-53 (9th Cir. 2003) (noting the broad range of conduct punishable under Ariz. Rev. Stat. 13-2301(D)(4) and applying the modified categorical approach to determine whether a petitioner's racketeering conviction constituted a "drug trafficking crime"). In applying the modified categorical approach, the evidence submitted by the government to prove a prior conviction in an immigration proceeding "must meet a 'clear and convincing' standard." Nijhawan, 557 U.S. at 41-42.

Page 9