Case Explained: ROBERTO DIAZ-BOYZO V. TODD BLANCHE

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-07-23 The Ninth Circuit denied Roberto Diaz-Boyzo’s petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order finding him removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(E)(i). The court held that Diaz-Boyzo’s 2013 conviction for fourth-degree assault under Oregon Revised Statutes § 163.160(1)(a), (3)(c) constitutes a “crime of child abuse, child neglect, or child abandonment.” Applying the categorical approach, the court determined that while the Oregon statute was overbroad because it covered conduct unrelated to children, it was divisible into discrete offenses based on alternative aggravating elements. Using the modified categorical approach and reviewing the indictment and plea agreement, the court found Diaz-Boyzo was convicted specifically under subsection (3)(c), which applies when an assault is committed in the immediate presence of or witnessed by a minor child. The panel concluded this offense matches the federal definition because committing an assault in the immediate presence of a child places the child in real danger of bodily or mental harm, satisfying the actus reus requirement established in *Leon-Briviesca v. Blanche*. Furthermore, the court found the statute satisfied the mens rea requirement, as Oregon law imputes at least criminal negligence to the circumstance element when no specific mental state is prescribed, which aligns with the minimum culpability required for a crime of child abuse under federal immigration law. As a result of this ruling, the petition for review is denied, and the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision removing Diaz-Boyzo from the United States stands. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.