The primary issue was whether his prior removal was invalid because it was based on a 245(a)(1) conviction, which the defendant argued was not a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16.
The Court disagreed. But there is a small silver lining for state court practice. The panel explained, "the Supreme Court of California has expressly stated that the mens rea for assault in California requires more than negligent conduct." So, if you have a state assault case where the prosecution is arguing a negligent/reckless assault theory, perhaps this case can be helpful.
Finally, of note, this decision addressed only the prior version of 245(a)(1), which was amended in 2011. So challenges to the newer version are not foreclosed.
