BIA just ruled that Criminally negligent homicide in violation of section 125.10 of the New York Penal Law is categorically not a crime involving moral turpitude, because it does not require that a perpetrator have a sufficiently culpable mental state.
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: BIA, board immigration appeals, criminal alien | Leave a comment »
In a case before the BIA on remand from the Ninth Circuit for further clarification of portions of the agency’s April 2011 decision in Matter of D-R-, the BIA held in a precedent decision issued today that a misrepresentation is material under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(i) when it tends to shut off a line of inquiry that is relevant to a non citizen’s admissibility and that would predictably have disclosed other facts relevant to eligibility for a visa, other documentation, or admission to the United States. The BIA further held that in determining whether a noncitizen assisted or otherwise participated in extrajudicial killing, an adjudicator should consider (1) the nexus between the noncitizen’s role, acts, or inaction and the extrajudicial killing and (2) scienter, meaning his or her prior or contemporaneous knowledge of the killing.
BIA rules on expert testimony and factual findings
BIA remands case back to USCIS
Filed under: BIA | Tagged: #bia, BIA, bia board of immigration appeals, BIA Pro Bono Project, board of immigration appeals, Fraud, Immigration, Immigration Attorney, Immigration Lawyer, inadmissibility, material representation, misrepresentation, Motion to Reopen with the BIA, scienter | Leave a comment »
In a case before the BIA on remand from the Ninth Circuit for further clarification of portions of the agency’s April 2011 decision in Matter of D-R-, the BIA held in a precedent decision issued today that a misrepresentation is material under INA §212(a)(6)(C)(i) when it tends to shut off a line of inquiry that is relevant to a non citizen’s admissibility and that would predictably have disclosed other facts relevant to eligibility for a visa, other documentation, or admission to the United States. The BIA further held that in determining whether a noncitizen assisted or otherwise participated in extrajudicial killing, an adjudicator should consider (1) the nexus between the noncitizen’s role, acts, or inaction and the extrajudicial killing and (2) scienter, meaning his or her prior or contemporaneous knowledge of the killing.
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: BIA, board of immigration appeals, Fraud, inadmissibility, material representation, misrepresentation, scienter | Leave a comment »
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: Appeal, asylum, BIA, China, persecution, religious persecution | Leave a comment »
Court Reverses BIA’s Determination That Salvadoran Petitioner Failed to Show Persecution on Account of Her Family Membership
The Fourth Circuit granted the petition for review and remanded, holding that, in affirming the IJ’s clearly erroneous factual finding that ignored critical evidence in the record, the BIA abused its discretion. The court found that the Salvadoran petitioner’s familial relationship to her father was “at least one central reason” that the MS-13 gang targeted and threatened the petitioner.
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: abuse of discretion, asylum, BIA, El Salvador | Leave a comment »
Where a petitioner seeking to prove a familial relationship submits a birth certificate that was not registered contemporaneously with the birth, an adjudicator must consider the birth certificate, as well as all the other evidence of record and the circumstances of the case, to determine whether the petitioner has submitted sufficient reliable evidence to demonstrate the claimed relationship by a preponderance of the evidence.
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia-2/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia-board-of-immigration-appeals/
https://californiaimmigration.us/bia-deference-given-to-particulary-serious-crime/
Filed under: BIA | Tagged: BIA, bia board of immigration appeals, birth certificate, delayed birth certificate, Immigration, Immigration Attorney, Immigration Lawyer | Leave a comment »
Clarifying Matter of C-J-H-, the BIA held that a noncitizen who adjusts status under INA §209(b) changes his or her status from that of a noncitizen granted asylum to that of a noncitizen lawfully admitted for permanent residence, thereby terminating his or her asylee status. The BIA further held that the restrictions on removal in INA §208(c)(1)(A) do not apply to a noncitizen granted asylum whose status is adjusted to that of a noncitizen lawfully admitted for permanent residence pursuant to INA §209(b).
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: asylee, asylum, BIA, board of immigration appeals, lawful permanent resident, LPR | Leave a comment »
The BIA dismissed the petitioner’s appeal, holding that an offense may be a “specified offense against a minor” within the meaning of section 111(7) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, even if it involved an undercover police officer posing as a minor, rather than an actual minor. Thus, the BIA found that the petitioner, who was convicted of computer-aided solicitation of a minor in Louisiana after he communicated via the internet with an individual who he believed was a 14-year-old girl but was actually an undercover police officer, was barred from obtaining an approved visa petition by the provisions of the Adam Walsh Act.
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: adam walsh act, awa, BIA, board of immigration appeals, sex crime against minor, walsh act | Leave a comment »
Where Congress had passed the Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRAIRA) after the petitioner had committed a drug offense but before his crime was adjudicated, the Second Circuit granted the petition for review and remanded, holding that because the petitioner had committed his drug offense prior to IIRAIRA’s passage, he should not have been forced to seek admission to the United States after his brief vacation to the Dominican Republic in 2007. The court further held that the BIA should evaluate the petitioner’s motions to reopen his removal proceedings and to stay his removal under the law in effect at the time of the commission of his 1990 drug offense.
Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: BIA, Immigration Court, iraira, retroactivity | Leave a comment »
Question: I am so sad. I lost at the Immigration Court and then I lost at the Board of Immigration Appeals. Is there anywhere else to go and anything else I can do to try to stay here in the U.S.?
Answer: Yes. You are eligible to file a Petition for Review to the Circuit Court of Appeals. Petitions for review must be filed and received by the court no later than 30 days after
the date of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) or the U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This deadline is jurisdictiona. The 30-day deadline for filing a petition for review is not extended either by filing a motion to reopen or reconsider or by the grant or extension of voluntary departure. Separate petitions for review must be filed for each BIA decision, including issues arising from the denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider.
ICE can deport an individual before the 30-day deadline to file a petition for review
Filing a petition for review does not stay the individual’s removal from the country; Instead, a separate request for a stay must be filed with the court. Filing a petition for review terminates the voluntary departure order, with one exception. A petition for review may be litigated even if the individual has been removed. However, you probably want to stay here, so try to get the Motion to Stay promptly filed.
Question: That’s good to hear. However, what exactly is a ‘petition for review’?
Answer: A petition for review is the document filed by, or on behalf of, an individual seeking review of an agency decision in a circuit court of appeals. In the immigration context, a petition for review is filed to obtain federal court review of a removal, deportation or exclusion decision issued by the BIA. In addition, a petition for review may be filed to obtain review of a removal order issued by ICE under a few very limited specific provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
Question: So what can you challenge in the Petition for Review?
Answer: A challenge to a BIA or ICE decision may involve legal, constitutional, factual, and/or
discretionary claims. In general, (1) legal claims assert that BIA/ICE erroneously applied or
interpreted the law (e.g., the INA or the regulations); (2) constitutional challenges assert that
BIA/ICE violated a constitutional right (e.g., due process or equal protection); (3) factual claims
assert that certain findings of fact made by BIA/ICE were erroneous; and (4) discretionary claims assert BIA/ICE abused its discretion by the manner in which it reached its conclusion.
Keep in mind that the 30-day deadline for filing a petition for review of the underlying decision is not extended by the filing of a motion to reopen or reconsider, nor is it extended by the grant or extension of voluntary departure. To obtain review of issues arising from a BIA decision and issues arising from the denial of a motion to reopen or reconsider, separate petitions for review of each BIA decision must be filed.
It is quite complex to properly do a Petition for Review, so be sure that you get a qualified immigration attorney to get it filed for you.
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/appeal-to-bia/
https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia-board-of-immigration-appeals/
https://californiaimmigration.us/bia-deference-given-to-particulary-serious-crime/
Filed under: BIA | Tagged: Appeal, BIA, board of immigration appeals, Deportation, Immigration, Immigration Attorney, Immigration Lawyer, Petition for Review | Leave a comment »
Immigration Lawyer
Brian D. Lerner Immigration Attorney & Deportation Lawyer Blog 