The following excerpt is from Diaz-Flores v. Garland, 993 F.3d 766 (9th Cir. 2021):
that burglary of a commercial, rather than a residential, building isn't categorically a crime involving moral turpitude. See Hernandez-Cruz v. Holder , 651 F.3d 1094, 1107 (9th Cir. 2011) (holding that burglary not involving a residence is not a CIMT). As discussed further below, unlawfully entering someone's residential dwelling implicates safety and privacy concerns unlike a commercial or non-residential space.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.