Thanks to the Immigrant and Refugee Law Center for sharing the Board of Immigration’s recent unpublished ruling in Charles Borromeo Ajaelu, A058 739 058 (BIA Sept. 3, 2015). That ruling found that Georgia’s generic theft statute did not qualify as a theft offense for purposes of the INA because the Georgia statute allowed the individual to come into possession of the property by multiple methods that are not divisible under the Descamps ruling. See Descamps v United States, 133 SCt 2276 (2013). Because of this, immigration authorities could not turn to the modified categorical approach to qualify the conviction.
For more information on the categorical v. non-categorical distinctions in US immigration law, check out with wonderful handout from the Immigrant Legal Resource Center.