Archive for the ‘Removal/Deportation’ Category
Wednesday, May 23rd, 2012
On March 28, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision, Vartelas v. Holder, No. 10-1211, rejecting the retroactive application of a provision of an immigration law passed by Congress in 1996 that has prevented many lawful permanent residents (LPRs) from returning to the United States after a trip abroad. Citing the “deeply rooted presumption” against applying new laws retroactively, the Court ruled 6-3 that LPRs who temporarily leave the country cannot be denied readmission on account of criminal convictions that occurred before the law took effect.
The Justice Department argued that LPRs with certain criminal convictions may be barred from re-entering the United States any time they leave the country—even if the law in effect at the time of their guilty pleas did not make them eligible for deportation or ineligible for reentry to the United States. The Supreme Court properly rejected this argument, noting that the government’s interpretation effectively prevented such LPRs from ever leaving the country.
In sum, before Congress enacted the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) in 1996, lawful permanent residents who had committed a crime of moral turpitude could return from brief trips abroad without applying for admission to the United States. However, after enactment of IIRIRA n 1996, lawful permanent residents who had committed a crime of moral turpitude were required to reapply for admission to the U.S. and the crime of moral turpitude (even though committed before the 1996 law) would place the lawful permanent resident into removal proceedings. This U.S. Supreme Court decision concludes that a returning lawful permanent resident cannot be placed in removal proceedings for a conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude that was committed before the 1996 IIRIRA laws.
Tags: 1996, 212(h), 212(i), 245(i), AAO, actor, Adam Walsh Act, adjustment of status, admission, adopted child, advance parole, affidavit of support, aged-out children, appeals, approval notice, arrest, arriving alien, asylum/refugee petitions, athlete, automatic citizenship, B-1, B-2, battered spouse petitions, BIA review, biometrics, brother, C, cancellation of removal, CBP, child, citizenship, conditional status, consular, conviction, crew, crimes involving moral turpitude, crimes of moral turpitude, D, daughter, death of petitioner, death of sponsor, deferred inspection, department of homeland security, department of state, deportation, derivative beneficiaries, detention, DHS, diversity visa lottery, DNA, doctor, dual citizenship, E-1, E-2, E-3, EB-1, EB-2, EB-3, EB-4, EB-5, embassy, employment authorization, entry without inspection, expedited removal, extreme hardship, family & employment sponsorship, farm worker, fiancé visas, Florida, forms, freedom of information act, G, good moral character, green cards, Guyana, Guyanese, H-1A, H-1B, H-1B1, H-1C, H-2B, H3, habeas corpus, Haiti, Haitian, Honduras, HRIFA, humanitarian., ICE, immediate relative, immigrant visa, Immigration Attorney, immigration lawyer, inadmissibility grounds, international adoptions, investor visas, J, joint sponsor, K-1, K-2, K-3, K-4, Kissimmee, L, labor certification, lawful permanent resident, legalization, M, marriage, marriage fraud, Miami, military, motion to reopen, musician, NAFTA, national visa center, naturalization, nonimmigrant visa, notice of hearing, notice to appear, NSEERS, nurse, O, Orlando, P, parent, passport, physician, preference category, priority worker, professor, prosecutorial discretion, public charge, receipt notice, registry, reinstatement of petitions, relief from removal, religious worker petitions, removal, request for evidence, S, SEVIS, sister, skilled worker, son, special immigrant, spouse, student visas, T, Tampa, temporary protected status, TN, tourist visa, travel, U, unlawful presence, unskilled worker, USCIS, V, veterans, visa waiver program, voluntary departure, waivers, widow, widow petitions, withholding of removal
Posted in Immigration Court, Removal/Deportation | No Comments »
Wednesday, May 23rd, 2012
In Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473 (2010), this Court held that criminal defendants receive ineffective assistance of counsel under the Sixth Amendment when their criminal attorneys fail to advise them that pleading guilty to an offense will subject them to deportation. The rule established through this case was that criminal defendants must be advised by their criminal attorney of the immigration consequences of a guilty or no contest plea in criminal proceedings. However, the case failed to state whether the rule applies retroactively, meaning, can criminal defendants who pled before 2010 (when the case was decided) claim ineffective assistance of counsel and challenge their prior convictions. In the State of Florida, the criminal courts have held that the Padilla decision is not retroactive and only applies to convictions after 2010.
Well, the U.S. Supreme Court will soon revisit this issue and decide whether the rule established in Padilla v. Kentucky, a 2010 decision, applies retroactively (or before 2010). The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Chaidez v. United States to determine whether Padilla applies to persons whose convictions became final before the 2010 court decision. If the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the 2010 Padilla decision is retroactive, then noncitizen convicted before 2010 that were not informed by their criminal attorney that their plea carries a risk of deportation may have an opportunity to vacate their convictions. This would allow many noncitizens who were removed/deported or currently in removal proceedings to challenge criminal convictions where they were not properly advised of immigration consequences of their pleas.
Tags: 212(h), 212(i), 245(i), AAO, actor, Adam Walsh Act, adjustment of status, admission, adopted child, advance parole, affidavit of support, aged-out children, appeals, approval notice, arrest, arriving alien, asylum/refugee petitions, athlete, automatic citizenship, B-1, B-2, battered spouse petitions, BIA review, biometrics, brother, C, cancellation of removal, CBP, child, citizenship, conditional status, consular, conviction, crew, crime, crimes involving moral turpitude, crimes of moral turpitude, criminal conviction, D, daughter, death of petitioner, death of sponsor, deferred inspection, department of homeland security, department of state, deportation, derivative beneficiaries, detention, DHS, diversity visa lottery, DNA, doctor, dual citizenship, E-1, E-2, E-3, EB-1, EB-2, EB-3, EB-4, EB-5, embassy, employment authorization, entry without inspection, expedited removal, extreme hardship, family & employment sponsorship, farm worker, fiancé visas, Florida, forms, freedom of information act, G, good moral character, green cards, Guyana, Guyanese, H-1A, H-1B, H-1B1, H-1C, H-2B, H3, habeas corpus, Haiti, Haitian, Honduras, HRIFA, humanitarian., ICE, immediate relative, immigrant visa, Immigration Attorney, immigration lawyer, inadmissibility grounds, international adoptions, investor visas, J, joint sponsor, K-1, K-2, K-3, K-4, Kissimmee, L, labor certification, lawful permanent resident, legalization, M, marriage, marriage fraud, Miami, military, motion to reopen, musician, NAFTA, national visa center, naturalization, nonimmigrant visa, notice of hearing, notice to appear, NSEERS, nurse, O, Orlando, P, padilla, parent, passport, physician, preference category, priority worker, professor, prosecutorial discretion, public charge, receipt notice, registry, reinstatement of petitions, relief from removal, religious worker petitions, removal, request for evidence, S, SEVIS, sister, skilled worker, son, special immigrant, spouse, student visas, T, Tampa, temporary protected status, TN, tourist visa, U, unlawful presence, unskilled worker, USCIS, V, veterans, visa waiver program, voluntary departure, waivers, widow, widow petitions, withholding of removal
Posted in Immigration Court, Removal/Deportation | No Comments »
Tuesday, September 20th, 2011
Unfortunately, many individuals don’t know what to expect if Immigration comes knocking at their door due to an expired visa/I-94, initiation of removal/deportation proceeding due to commission of a crime, or execution of a final order of removal/deportation. Also, Immigration can visit your job and detained you at your worksite. Recently, Immigration has engaged in numerous worksite raids at corporations that hire a large number of immigrants.
So, what are the DO’S and DON’TS if Immigration comes knocking at your door or job?
1. Be Respectful: Refer to the Immigration Officer as “Sir” or “Madam” or “Officer.” Though the Immigration Officer may not treat you with respect, you should show respect because the decisions regarding your detention, issuance of bond, or release initially rest in their hands.
2. Get the name of the Immigration Officer: ask the officer for his/her business card. If he/she is not willing to give you a business card, then casually ask for his/her name. Make a mental note or write down their name.
3. Ask the Immigration Officer where you are being taken: this is very important because in most states, Immigration has more than one detention center. As an immigration lawyer, I find it difficult to locate my clients when the family members cannot tell me where my client is being held. Sometimes, it takes 2-3 hours to call every detention center in the state to locate my client. Immigration is not always very helpful.
4. While being processed-ask to use the phone: the first place Immigration will take you is to an office where you will be fingerprinted and photograph. They will also ask you questions about your status and family member and create a “Record of Proceeding”. Also, they will serve you with a “Notice to Appear,” which initiates the removal/deportation process. Politely ask the Immigration officer if you can use the phone to call your family member to let them know you are safe.
5. Inform family member where you are & name of Immigration Officer: Once you get to speak with your family member, give them the name of the detention center you will be taken to and the name of the Immigration officer. This information will be helpful to the immigration attorney hired to represent you.
6. Do Not Sign any Documents: The Immigration Officer will present numerous documents to you for your signature. DO NOT SIGN ANY DOCUMENTS. Simply write, “Refuse to Sign” in the signature block. There have been numerous cases where immigrants sign documents not knowing that they are waiving a judicial hearing and choosing expedited removal/deportation. Once an attorney is retained to represent you, the attorney will review the documents and advise you of the legal ramifications of each document.
7. Do Not Submit to Threats by Immigration Officer: I have heard stories of Immigration Officers making threatening remarks such as “If you don’t sign these documents or cooperate, we will hold you here for 6-9 months” or “If you hire an attorney, we will deport you tomorrow”. Do not believe these statements. Removal/deportation is a process and takes at least 2-3 months with a final order or removal/deportation. Immigration Officers don’t like to see you hire an attorney because you will be advised of reliefs and waivers that will allow you to remain in the U.S. Additionally, they know that when an attorney is involved, they must be on their best behavior because the attorney will not hesitate to speak with their supervisor or file a complaint against the Department of Homeland Security.
8. Exercise Right for Bond Hearing: The Immigration Officer will ask you if you want a hearing to determine bond – always answer, “Yes”. Contact your family members and tell them to hire an immigration attorney to represent you at the hearing.
9. Be Patience: It is tough to be held in a detention center and to be away from your family. I always urge my clients to be patience with the process and don’t rush to give up and opt for removal/deportation without a hearing. In most cases, my clients that are held in detention are eligible for some type of relief from removal/deportation but we can only apply for such relief in immigration court. There is a 1-2 years backlog in the immigration court but when you are in detention center, your case can take 3-6 months.
10. Inform Immigration Officer of Special Dietary Needs or Medical Conditions: If you have special dietary or food needs (such as vegetarian), make sure you inform the immigration officer so they can make the proper arrangements for your food. Also, if you have any medical conditions and require daily medicine, advise the immigration officer so they can have your family bring your medicine or make arrangements for you to have your medicine at the detention facility.
Remember, at the end of the day, though Immigration Officers try to make you feel that they are trying to help you, they are more concerned with their job security and showing statistically that the U.S. is safer due to increased removal/deportation. The only person who has your best interest in mind is your immigration lawyer. Our office is available 24/7 to assist in these types of detention emergencies – if you get the voicemail message, simply hit “1” to be connected directly to the lawyer’s cell phone.
Tags: Miami Tampa Orlando Immigration Lawyer Deportation Removal Waiver Bond Hearing Visa Green Card Citizenship Naturalization Work Permit Family Sponsorship Petition Employer Investor
Posted in Removal/Deportation | No Comments »
Friday, September 9th, 2011
On August 18, the Obama Administration announced the formation of a high-level working group to review approximately 300,000 pending removal cases and administratively close proceedings against individuals found to be a “low” enforcement priority. The review process, which will be conducted by members of the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security, is intended to ease the tremendous backlog in the immigration courts and to ensure that government resources are focused on cases involving the government’s highest immigration enforcement priorities—public safety, national security and border security. In determining whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion, working group members will take relationships of LGBT families into account, just as they will all other family ties. Although no category of cases will receive a blanket exercise of favorable prosecutorial discretion, certain categories of individuals—including veterans, long-time permanent residents, minors, the elderly, individuals who have been present since childhood, individuals with serious disabilities or health issues, nursing or pregnant women, and victims of domestic violence or other serious crimes—will receive particular attention. Respondents whose cases are administratively closed will be eligible to apply for an employment authorization document through USCIS.
Tags: tampa miami orlando immigration lawyer removal administ
Posted in Removal/Deportation | No Comments »
Monday, August 24th, 2009
A new report from the Cardozo Immigration Justice Clinic entitled, “Constitution on ICE: A Report on Immigration Home Raid Operations,” is an analysis of the available evidence regarding the prevalence of constitutional violations occurring during ICE home raids. Through two Freedom of information Act lawsuits, the authors of this report obtained significant samples of ICE arrest records from home raid operations in New York and New Jersey. According to the author’s analysis of these records, together with other publicly available documents, there is an established pattern of misconduct by ICE agents in the New York and New Jersey Field offices. Further, the report shows that such pattern may be a widespread national phenomenon reaching beyond these local offices. The pattern of misconduct involves ICE agents illegally:• entering homes without legal authority – for example, physically pushing or breaking their way into private residences;• seizing non-target individuals during home raid operations– for example, seizing innocent people in their bedrooms without any basis;• searching homes without legal authority – for example, breaking down locked doors inside homes; and• seizing individuals based solely on racial or ethnic appearance or on limited English proficiency.Follow link to report: http://www.cardozo.yu.edu/uploadedFiles/Cardozo/Profiles/immigrationlaw-741/IJC_ICE-Home-Raid-Report%20Updated.pdf
Posted in Removal/Deportation | No Comments »
