Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

invalidated deportation order

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • invalidated deportation order

    INS regulations require that a person facing deportation be advised of the possibility for relief from deportation. 8 C.F.R. §§ 240.49(a)("The immigration judge shall inform the respondent of his or her apparent eligibility to apply for . . . [a waiver of deportation] and shall afford the respondent an opportunity to make application therefore during the hearing.")3 This Court has repeatedly held that this provision is "mandatory." See Arrieta, 224 F.3d at 1079; United States v. ArceHernandez, 163 F.3d 559, 563 (9th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, where the record, "fairly reviewed by an individual who is intimately familiar with the immigration laws - as IJs no doubt are - raises a reasonable possibility that the petitioner may be eligible for relief, the IJ must inform the alien of this possibility and give him the opportunity to develop the issue." Moran-Enriquez, 884 F.2d at 423. Immigration Judges "are not expected to be clairvoyant; the record before them must fairly raise the issue." Id. at 422. Failure to so inform the alien is a denial of due process that invalidates the underlying deportation proceeding (i was deported 10 yrs ago can i still do anything about it?)

  • #2
    INS regulations require that a person facing deportation be advised of the possibility for relief from deportation. 8 C.F.R. §§ 240.49(a)("The immigration judge shall inform the respondent of his or her apparent eligibility to apply for . . . [a waiver of deportation] and shall afford the respondent an opportunity to make application therefore during the hearing.")3 This Court has repeatedly held that this provision is "mandatory." See Arrieta, 224 F.3d at 1079; United States v. ArceHernandez, 163 F.3d 559, 563 (9th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, where the record, "fairly reviewed by an individual who is intimately familiar with the immigration laws - as IJs no doubt are - raises a reasonable possibility that the petitioner may be eligible for relief, the IJ must inform the alien of this possibility and give him the opportunity to develop the issue." Moran-Enriquez, 884 F.2d at 423. Immigration Judges "are not expected to be clairvoyant; the record before them must fairly raise the issue." Id. at 422. Failure to so inform the alien is a denial of due process that invalidates the underlying deportation proceeding (i was deported 10 yrs ago can i still do anything about it?)

    Comment


    • #3
      What were the grounds for your deportation?

      You may have a case for appeal, but realistically you'd probably have to be in the US for that to work (and I will not recommend an undocumented entry).

      If it's been 10 years, then depending upon the circumstances of your removal you may now be eligible for a waiver.

      Please note that I am not a lawyer and I do not give legal advice.
      --------------------
      "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. " - Thomas Jefferson

      Comment


      • #4
        elchevoludo: You obviously were deported for a reason...and America hasn't missed a beat since you left.

        What exactly are you planning to appeal?

        Do you really think that we care?

        Comment


        • #5
          Benefit of the doubt, SunDevil. Get some backstory before you run in guns blazing.
          --------------------
          "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. " - Thomas Jefferson

          Comment


          • #6
            SunDevilUSA you do have a little knowledge of your GREAT CONSTITUTION? dont you? ever read of constitutional violations?give it a try

            Comment


            • #7
              212 (C) St Cyr?

              Comment


              • #8
                <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">elchevoludo: You obviously were deported for a reason...and America hasn't missed a beat since you left.

                What exactly are you planning to appeal?

                Do you really think that we care? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                SunDevil, sometimes they do get it wrong:

                http://www.nilc.org/immlawpolicy/rem...movcrim088.htm
                "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

                Comment


                • #9
                  <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">

                  SunDevil, sometimes they do get it wrong:

                  http://www.nilc.org/immlawpolicy/rem...movcrim088.htm </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                  Nice article Brit! From where I come from, if Constitutional rights are violated, the entire proceedings are voided and the accused gets an opportunity to challenge the suit.

                  Not sure though how they handle it insofar as immigration laws are.
                  Do all the good you can, in all the ways you can, as long as ever you can.

                  --John Wesley

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Nice article Brit! From where I come from, if Constitutional rights are violated, the entire proceedings are voided and the accused gets an opportunity to challenge the suit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                    That's how it should be. If the authorities can't get their act together, then the accused should be able to challenge it regardless of weather it's a USC or immigrant involved.

                    The "aggravated felony" bit in the INA reform of 1996 is so wide ranging and poorly written, it's not surprising that some are getting caught out under this act. How can it be that a simple misdemenor from years ago be suddenly redefined as an aggravated felony?
                    "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brit4064:
                      <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Nice article Brit! From where I come from, if Constitutional rights are violated, the entire proceedings are voided and the accused gets an opportunity to challenge the suit. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                      That's how it should be. If the authorities can't get their act together, then the accused should be able to challenge it regardless of weather it's a USC or immigrant involved.

                      The "aggravated felony" bit in the INA reform of 1996 is so wide ranging and poorly written, it's not surprising that some are getting caught out under this act. How can it be that a simple misdemenor from years ago be suddenly redefined as an aggravated felony? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                      Yup, I agree. If at all, the severity of an act cannot be made to be worse than it is. New laws/policies making an act worse than it is should not be made to apply retroactively. That's totally unfair to the accused, or convict even.

                      But then, this concerns immigration. Somehow, I have this feeling that a lot of arbitrariness is involved. (Lucky for me, I didn't have that problem, but reading some people's stories here, I have that feeling that a lot of "luck" is needed, otherwise, one finds one's self in a very "complicated" situation.)
                      Do all the good you can, in all the ways you can, as long as ever you can.

                      --John Wesley

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yup, I agree. If at all, the severity of an act cannot be made to be worse than it is. New laws/policies making an act worse than it is should not be made to apply retroactively. That's totally unfair to the accused, or convict even.

                        But then, this concerns immigration. Somehow, I have this feeling that a lot of arbitrariness is involved. (Lucky for me, I didn't have that problem, but reading some people's stories here, I have that feeling that a lot of "luck" is needed, otherwise, one finds one's self in a very "complicated" situation.) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                        True. The USCIS seem to apply these laws unevenly often. This might not be vindictive, could be just mis-interpretation of the complex INA itself. The famous case of the Nigerian woman deported for a previous shoplifting conviction proves this point:

                        http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jun/1/126967.html

                        And yes, some kind of statue of limitation should apply. There is a rule on a 15 year lapse since a conviction occurred before applying for an immigration benefit, but I think it doesn't apply in cases of aggravated felony or a CIMT.
                        "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brit4064:
                          <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Yup, I agree. If at all, the severity of an act cannot be made to be worse than it is. New laws/policies making an act worse than it is should not be made to apply retroactively. That's totally unfair to the accused, or convict even.

                          But then, this concerns immigration. Somehow, I have this feeling that a lot of arbitrariness is involved. (Lucky for me, I didn't have that problem, but reading some people's stories here, I have that feeling that a lot of "luck" is needed, otherwise, one finds one's self in a very "complicated" situation.) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                          True. The USCIS seem to apply these laws unevenly often. This might not be vindictive, could be just mis-interpretation of the complex INA itself. The famous case of the Nigerian woman deported for a previous shoplifting conviction proves this point:

                          http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jun/1/126967.html

                          And yes, some kind of statue of limitation should apply. There is a rule on a 15 year lapse since a conviction occurred before applying for an immigration benefit, but I think it doesn't apply in cases of aggravated felony or a CIMT. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                          Thanks Brit! I will read it. What's a CIMT?
                          Do all the good you can, in all the ways you can, as long as ever you can.

                          --John Wesley

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Thanks Brit! I will read it. What's a CIMT? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

                            Crime In Moral Turpitude. What is and isn't considered a CIMT for Immigration purposes is more like what is left that isn't an CIMT!

                            http://www.ncids.org/Defender%20Training/Kicking%20It%2...al%20Proceedings.pdf
                            "What you see in the photograph isn't what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organized visual lying."

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              thank god,for the 9th circuit court of appeals (IMMIGRATION LAW IN THE 9TH CIRCUIT) just ran into it god bless AMERICA & all its people after 10 yrs i still consider it my country

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X