ORDER
This case is REMANDED to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) to determine whether Petitioner’s conviction qualifies as a misdemeanor under either California Penal Code section 17(b)(1) or 17(b)(3). See Ferreira v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d 1045, 1051 (9th Cir.2004) (“Once the state court sentenced [Petitioner] to a county jail term rather than a term in the state prison, the offense automatically converted from a felony into a misdemeanor for all purposes.”), overruled on other grounds by Ceron v. Holder, 747 F.3d 773, 778 (9th Cir.2014) (en banc); Garcia-Lopez v. Ashcroft, 334 F.3d 840, 842 (9th Cir.2003) (The “state court’s declaration that [Petitioner’s] offense was a misdemeanor is binding on [Petitioner’s] subsequent immigration proceedings^]”), overruled on other grounds by Ceron v. Holder, 747 F.3d at 778.
We are also concerned about the apparent ineffectiveness of petitioner’s counsel. The BIA’s April 29, 2009 decision explained: “The respondent has a valid ‘conviction’ for immigration purposes and his planned future collateral attack upon that conviction does not operate to negate its validity until it is in fact overturned or materially amended.” On July 17, 2009, within the 90 day window to reopen with the BIA, Petitioner’s conviction was materially amended. The Superior Court “re-ducted] the felony offense to a misdemean- or” under California Penal Code section 17. Petitioner’s counsel, however, did not move to reopen with the BIA to submit this new evidence. Ineffective assistance of counsel can toll the deadline to file a motion to reopen. See Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 677 (9th Cir.2011). Petitioner may wish to obtain new counsel.1 Alternatively, the BIA might consider appointment of pro bono counsel.
Petitioner’s removal is STAYED pending the resolution of his appeal. The panel retains jurisdiction over subsequent appeals in this case.
Petitioner’s counsel is ordered to serve Mr. Cruz a copy of this order at his last known address.
LIMITED REMAND.