Divided Court Concludes False Documents Submitted During Immigration Process Were “Required” and Covered by Statute

US v. Aborisade: Aborisade, who was not a lawyer, ran a “legal center” where he primarily helped clients file “various immigration petitions,” including those under the Violence Against Women Act’s “self-petitions” system for abused spouses. For those petitions, Aborisade used prior psychological evaluations and modified them for use by other applicants, as well as fabricating lease documents. His clients ultimately submitted the false documents as part of their petitions. Aborisade was ultimately convicted at trial of numerous counts, primarily of vias fraud and aggravated identity theft  and sentenced to 57 months in prison.

On appeal, a divided Fourth Circuit affirmed Aborisade’s convictions. The primary issue was whether the false documents at issue were “required” to be part of the applications at issue, as the statute required. The Court concluded that they were, holding that while those types of documents were not specifically required, some evidence was required to prove eligibility under VAWA and since those documents were that evidence it was “required.” The court also rejected Aborisade’s argument that he could not be convicted under the statute because he did not personally present the petitions (with the false documents) to immigration authorities.

Judge Heytens dissented, arguing that the statute does not require the submission of “any one document or type of document” and that the necessary proof could come from other sources, such as witnesses. Therefore, the documents at issue were not “required” under the statute.