A domestic violence case can affect a noncitizen's immigration status more than one way. A conviction for a federally defined crime of domestic violence is a deportable offense, and separately, a court finding that a protective order was violated can trigger removal with no conviction at all. Whether the charge also counts as a crime involving moral turpitude is a different, fact-dependent question, and citizenship status changes the analysis.
Is a domestic violence conviction a deportable offense
Federal law makes a noncitizen deportable after being convicted of a federally defined "crime of domestic violence." 8 U.S.C. section 1227(a)(2)(E)(i) defines that term as a "crime of violence," as defined in 18 U.S.C. section 16, committed against a current or former spouse, a co-parent, someone who lives or lived with the person as a spouse, or another person protected under a state's domestic violence laws. Section 16 has two parts, but in Sessions v. Dimaya (2018) the Supreme Court struck down the broader second part, the residual clause, as unconstitutionally vague as used in immigration law, so what remains is the part requiring an offense that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another.
California's corporal injury statute, Penal Code section 273.5, which can be punished as a felony or a misdemeanor, requires proof that the defendant willfully inflicted corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition on a spouse, cohabitant, dating partner, co-parent, or other qualifying partner, so a conviction under it generally includes the kind of force element this federal ground is looking for. That is different from Penal Code section 243(e)(1), domestic battery, which can be committed by an intentional touching without consent and does not require any injury. In Matter of Sanudo, 23 I&N Dec. 968 (BIA 2006), the Board of Immigration Appeals held that, in removal cases arising in the Ninth Circuit, which includes California, a 243(e)(1) conviction did not categorically qualify as a crime of violence, so it was not categorically a crime of domestic violence either. Whether a specific conviction actually fits the federal definition still depends on the exact statute and record of conviction, not the "domestic violence" label on the police report. This deeper breakdown by citizenship status compares what the government has to prove for a green card holder against this specific ground.
Does a protective order violation count even without a conviction
Yes, separately. Section 1227(a)(2)(E)(ii) makes a noncitizen deportable when a court determines that the person violated the portion of a protective order meant to protect against credible threats of violence, repeated harassment, or bodily injury. This ground does not require a criminal conviction at all; the statute covers temporary or final protection orders issued by civil or criminal courts, and a court's finding of a violation can be enough by itself. Simply being named in a protective order, or being accused of violating one, is not the same as a court actually making that finding. In Matter of Obshatko, 27 I&N Dec. 173 (BIA 2017), the Board held that an immigration judge deciding this ground looks at reliable evidence of what the state court actually determined about the violation, rather than applying the categorical approach used for conviction-based grounds. Because this ground can apply even when a criminal case is resolved favorably, a protective order case deserves its own careful review, separate from the underlying criminal charge.
Is domestic violence a crime involving moral turpitude
That is a different legal question from the two grounds above, and it does not have one fixed answer for every domestic violence charge. A crime involving moral turpitude, or CIMT, generally means a crime that is inherently base, vile, or depraved, and contrary to the accepted rules of morality, and immigration judges compare the specific statute and conviction record against that standard rather than the facts a police report describes. One CIMT committed within five years after admission (ten years for a permanent resident whose status came under 8 U.S.C. section 1255(j)), for which a sentence of a year or longer may be imposed, or two or more CIMTs at any time after admission that did not arise out of a single scheme, can trigger a separate deportability ground under section 1227(a)(2)(A); a related but distinct inadmissibility version of the CIMT rule is covered in this CIMT inadmissibility breakdown.
For California's two main domestic violence statutes, the answer depends on which statute and what the record shows. In Matter of Sanudo, the Board held that domestic battery under Penal Code sections 242 and 243(e)(1) is not categorically a CIMT, because the minimal conduct the offense requires is a touching without consent, with no injury or intent to injure needed. Section 273.5 has been treated differently because it requires an actual injury: Sanudo itself pointed to Matter of Tran, 21 I&N Dec. 291 (BIA 1996), where the Board held that willful infliction of corporal injury on a spouse, cohabitant, or parent of the offender's child under section 273.5(a) is a CIMT. But in Morales-Garcia v. Holder, 567 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2009), the federal appeals court that hears California immigration cases held that a section 273.5(a) conviction for abuse of a cohabitant is not categorically a CIMT, and sent the case back for a closer look at the record of conviction. Section 273.5 currently covers a broad range of relationships, including former cohabitants and dating or engagement relationships. So whether a particular 273.5 conviction counts as a CIMT can turn on the relationship involved and what the record of conviction shows, and neither answer should be assumed without that review.
Does your citizenship or immigration status change the analysis
All three grounds above apply to an "alien," a person who is not a United States citizen or national. A naturalized citizen is not ordinarily subject to these removal grounds; undoing citizenship requires its own separate legal process and is not an automatic consequence of a later charge. A green card holder does not have that protection and can be charged under any of the three grounds discussed above. The citizenship-status comparison for a domestic violence case walks through what changes for a green card holder, a pending case, and a naturalized citizen in more detail than repeated here.
What should you do before accepting a plea
Get the charging document, any protective order and related findings, and proof of your current immigration status together before any plea decision. Immigration counsel should review a proposed plea before you accept it, since the exact subsection pleaded to, and whether a court made a separate protective order finding, can decide which of the grounds above actually applies. The firm has written about this same crossover for a different charge, DUI immigration consequences, and the broader collateral immigration consequences a criminal case can carry are worth reviewing alongside this page.
A domestic violence charge with immigration consequences on the line needs both criminal defense and immigration input before anything is decided. The Law Offices of David S. Chesley can go over the actual charging document and any protective order with you; call (800) 755-5174.