• Hours & Info

    (562) 495-0554
    M-F: 8:00am - 6:00 p.m.
    Sat: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
  • Social

  • Past Blog Posts

Court Affirms Reinstatement of Prior Removal Order After Illegal Reentry

The Seventh Circuit denied the petition for review, rejecting the argument that, because reentry by the previously removed petitioner was “procedurally irregular,” he was entitled to a full hearing before an immigration judge rather than being subject to reinstatement of his prior removal order.

Attorney General Announces Zero-Tolerance Policy for Criminal Illegal Entry

DOJ announced that Attorney General Jeff Sessions notified all U.S. Attorney’s Offices along the southwest border of a new “zero-tolerance policy” for offenses under 8 U.S.C. §1325(a), which prohibits both attempted illegal entry and illegal entry into the United States by an individual. Sessions further directed the U.S. Attorney’s Offices to prosecute all DHS referrals for §1325(a) violations to the extent practicable.

Entered illegally after a deportation order AND have a 245(i) application? Which controls?

The Ninth Circuit reversed the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of the petitioner’s adjustment of status application, finding that the petitioner reasonably relied on Acosta v. Gonzales, which was the law of the circuit in effect at the time he applied to adjust status, but which was later overruled by Garfias-Rodriguez v. Holder. The court held that the BIA’s decision in Matter of Briones should not be applied retroactively to bar the petitioner’s application, because the petitioner’s reliance interests and the burden that retroactivity would impose on him outweighed the interest in uniform application of the immigration laws.

Case out of 5th Circuit Prohibits application for Asylum

The Fifth Circuit affirmed the Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of the petition for review, finding that INA §241(a)(5)’s plain language, relevant regulations, and analogous case law compel the conclusion that immigrants whose removal orders are reinstated following illegal re-entry into the United States may not apply for asylum.

Illegal Reentry? Try to get it vacated for violation of due process.

Have an Illegal Reentry? How to get it vacated so you don’t have to go to prison


Question: I had a deportation order years ago. I re-entered the U.S. illegally, got caught and was convicted in U.S. District Court for illegal reentry. I am serving a three year sentence. Is there anything that I can do?


Answer: Actually, there was a great case that just came out of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal.The panel vacated a conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after deportation or removal in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1326 and remanded for the district court to consider whether the defendant was prejudiced by the deprivation of his due process rights in his removal proceeding.


The panel held that the IJ erred when she failed to advise the defendant of the possibility of relief under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c). The panel explained that § 440(d) of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act was not effective as to proceedings, such as the defendant’s, that had commenced prior to the date of the Act’s enactment.


In addition, the provision of IIRIRA that eliminated relief under § 1182(c) did not apply to aliens, like the defendant, whose proceedings had commenced before the enactment of IIRIRA. The panel vacated the defendant’s conviction and sentence and remanded for the district court to consider whether he was prejudiced by the deprivation of his due process rights in his 1999 removal proceeding. The panel stated that if the defendant was not prejudiced, then the district court could reinstate his conviction and sentence. If the defendant was prejudiced, then the district court must dismiss the indictment.


Question: Does  this mean that I might be able to get out of prison?


Answer: Yes, it would be possible if the proper motions were made to show that your illegal reentry conviction should be vacated due to your due process rights being violated at immigration Court.


Question: I am not the best person in the world and have had some crimes.


Answer: Not to worry. If your due process rights were violated, then regardless of the crimes, your conviction should be vacated. For example, in this 9th Circuit case just entered, that defendant was actually no model citizen either. His name was Guzman. Guzman was born in Mexico, but came to the United States in 1979, when he was about six years old. He became a Legal Permanent Resident (“LPR”) on July 13, 1989. He was far from being a perfect peregrine; rather, he committed numerous crimes and on December 21, 1995, a deportation proceeding was initiated against him. Undeterred, he committed a robbery in California, was convicted of first degree robbery1 on February 14, 1997, and was sentenced to four years’ imprisonment as a result. Because state criminal proceedings necessitated a delay in the deportation proceeding, it was administratively closed in 1997. Guzman served his term, and the deportation proceeding was reopened. On August 12, 1999, the robbery conviction was added to the charges supporting his deportation. On August 25, 1999, the immigration judge (IJ) found that he was deportable as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony (8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii)) and a firearm offense (8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(C)), and that he was ineligible for discretionary relief based upon his robbery conviction. Guzman waived his right to appeal. He was deported. He then entered illegally three times and ultimately the illegal reentry was set aside.
Thus, it is certainly possible, but you need to have your case properly analyzed – especially the original deportation proceeding to see if there is any possibility of due process violations.

Did Immigration Judge forget to let you know your rights?

The Ninth Circuit vacated the defendant’s conviction for illegal reentry, holding that the defendant’s due process rights were violated when the Immigration Judge (IJ) failed to advise the defendant during his 1999 removal proceeding about the availability of potential discretionary relief under INA §212(c). The court remanded for consideration of whether the defendant was prejudiced by the deprivation of his due process rights.

Got illegal Reentry? Got a defense?

The Ninth Circuit reversed the defendant’s conviction for illegal reentry, holding that by asking the defendant to comment on the credibility of a border patrol agent—a key witness against him—then referring to evidence not before the jury to bolster the agent’s testimony, the government deprived the defendant of the fair trial guaranteed by the Due Process Clause.

District Court Adopts CA6 Flores Holding Regarding TPS and Adjustment of Status

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that a TPS beneficiary who is eligible for an immigrant visa and has an immigrant visa immediately available to him is eligible for adjustment of status under INA §245(a), notwithstanding having originally entered the U.S. without inspection.

CA10 on “Illegal Reentry” for Purposes of Reinstatement of Removal

The court held that where Petitioner was waived through at the border one month after her removal from the U.S., she “reenter[ed] the United States illegally” for purposes of reinstatement of removal under INA §241(a)(5).

%d bloggers like this: