In a recent decision issued by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), it seems that it is more likely than not that the offense of fleeing to elude a police officer is a crime involving moral turpitude, also called CIMT. In the Decision of Matter of Ruiz-Lopez, BIA 2011, the BIA gave an extensive explanation of which driving offenses constitute a crime involving moral turpitude. The BIA explains that fleeing to elude a police officer is a crime involving moral turpitude because the Respondent knows that the police officer has asked him to stop, and in reckless disregard of the Officer’s command, the Respondent still drove in a reckless manner that could endanger his life, others and even the Officer’s life, due to the Respondent’s willful behavior to flee from the Officer.
As a result of the conviction of fleeing to elude a police officer, the Respondent was found ineligible for cancellation of removal because he had committed a crime that is listed under 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which is a crime involving moral turpitude. The Respondent had entered the U.S. without inspection over 10 years before removal proceedings were started again him. Although he would usually be eligible for cancellation of removal due to his presence in the U.S. for over 10 years, because of his conviction noted above, the BIA held that he was not eligible for this immigration relief.