Benjamin Sandoval Diaz v. Todd Blanche

── Benjamin Sandoval Diaz v. Todd Blanche ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Date: April 20, 2026 Category: General USCA4 Appeal: 24-1062 Doc: 51 Filed: 04/20/2026 Pg: 1 of 23 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-1062 BENJAMIN SANDOVAL DIAZ, Petitioner, v. TODD BLANCHE, Acting U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Argued: January 29, 2026 Decided: April 20, 2026 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Petition for review denied by published opinion. Judge King wrote the opinion, in which Judge Niemeyer joined. Judge Harris wrote a dissenting opinion. ARGUED: Rebekah Goncarvos Grafton, FAY GRAFTON NUNEZ, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Petitioner. Mohammed Samer Budeir, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. ON BRIEF: Ana S. Nunez, FAY GRAFTON NUNEZ, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Petitioner. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Melissa K. Lott, Virginia L. Gordon, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. USCA4 Appeal: 24-1062 Doc: 51 Filed: 04/20/2026 Pg: 2 of 23 KING, Circuit Judge: Petitioner Benjamin Sandoval Diaz seeks review of a 2023 decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (the “BIA Decision”), which affirmed an Immigration Judge’s 2019 denial of Diaz’s application for cancellation of removal (the “IJ Decision”). The IJ Decision and the BIA Decision each concluded that Diaz was not entitled to relief because he failed to sustain his burden of proving that he satisfies the “good moral character” requirement for a cancellation of removal. And that was so because Diaz testified — under oath and represented by counsel — to separate North Carolina crimes of possession, sale, and delivery of cocaine. Diaz thus committed felony drug offenses that contravene North Carolina General Statute § 90-95(a)(1) (hereinafter the “N.C. Drug Law”). By his petition for review, Diaz contends that the BIA Decision erred in declining to vacate the IJ Decision, in that the IJ failed to apply BIA precedent — specifically a 1957 BIA decision called Matter of K-, 7 I&N Dec. 594 (BIA 1957) (hereinafter “Matter of K”). Diaz also maintains that both the IJ Decision and the BIA Decision erroneously ruled that his testimony before the IJ satisfy the elements of the N.C. Drug Law under which Diaz had been indicted. As explained herein, we deny Diaz’s petition for review. I. A. Petitioner Diaz, a native and citizen of Mexico, unlawfully entered the United States nearly 30 years ago, in 1997. On January 14, 2015, Diaz was arrested in Wake County, North Carolina, and charged with three felony drug offenses under the N.C. Drug Law. 2 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1062 Doc: 51 Filed: 04/20/2026 Pg: 3 of 23 That is, he was charged with (1) possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, (2) sale of cocaine, and (3) delivery of cocaine. On May 18, 2015, a grand jury in Wake County indicted Diaz for each of those offenses. Diaz was never tried or convicted, however, because the North Carolina prosecutors dismissed all three charges on July 5, 2017, in exchange for Diaz’s cooperation against several others i