FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Immigration Law

Singh v. US Attorney Gen.
(U.S. 11th Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Immigration Law, Per Curiam, Sentencing) Petitioner was properly deemed deportable as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony (burglary) for which a sentence of at least one year was imposed. A conviction in adult court is a conviction for immigration purposes, no matter how old the alien was at the time of the offense. 12/31/2008

US v. Algarate-Valencia
(U.S. 10th Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Immigration Law, Sentencing) District court did not commit plain error when it gave defendant's counsel only thirty seconds to speak at his sentencing hearing, and its explanation of the sentence was adequate. The forty-six month sentence for illegal re-entry of a removed alien, which reflected a downward departure and fell at the bottom of the resulting Guidelines range, was substantively reasonable. 12/30/2008

Khrystotodorov v. Mukasey
(U.S. 8th Cir., Immigration Law) The IJ had reasonable grounds for questioning petitioner's credibility and for requesting additional corroborative evidence to support a grant of asylum under the Convention Against Torture, where there were significant variances between his testimony, alleging persecution of Ukrainian Baptists by the UNA-UNSO, and the objective information in the background country reports. 12/29/2008

Al Milaji v. Mukasey
(U.S. 8th Cir., Immigration Law) Under IIRIRA, the court lacks authority to reinstate an expired period of voluntary departure. Substantial evidence supports an IJ's adverse credibility finding, where: 1) there were conflicting accounts as to whether petitioner had been arrested in Syria; 2) he held the rank of sergeant in the Syrian military; 3) he entered and departed Syria multiple times, not seeking asylum in other countries that he visited; and 4) he did not apply for asylum for three years after entering the US. 12/29/2008

Ghaffar v. Mukasey
(U.S. 7th Cir., Administrative Law, Immigration Law) Court lacks jurisdiction to review the determination that Petitioner's belated filing of his asylum application was not justified by changed or extraordinary circumstances. His claims regarding IJ bias, and the BIA's failure to make a record of his wife's testimony, were both within the Board's power to address, and thus he was required to raise these claims before the BIA. 12/29/2008

Amilcar-Orellana v. Mukasey
(U.S. 1st Cir., Administrative Law, Immigration Law) Petition by citizens of El Salvador for review of a BIA decision denying asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), is denied where: 1) having testified against two gang members in an arson investigation did not entitle petitioner to asylum based on a fear of persecution for his political beliefs; 2) substantial evidence supported the conclusion that petitioner was not likely to be targeted based on his membership in a social group; and 3) relief under the CAT was not available where petitioner did not demonstrate a fear of being tortured at the instigation of the government. 12/24/2008

Dukuly v. Mukasey
(U.S. 8th Cir., Immigration Law) Petition for review of a BIA decision upholding an IJ's denial of an adjustment of status for a Liberian citizen is dismissed where: 1) adjustment of status is a discretionary decision committed to the Attorney General; 2) the circuit court lacks jurisdiction to review such a decision; and 3) petitioner failed to show fundamental unfairness or procedural irregularities that prejudiced his case. 12/24/2008

Skurtu v. Mukasey
(U.S. 8th Cir., Civil Procedure, Habeas Corpus, Immigration Law) In an action brought by petitioner, who had formerly been ordered removed to Moldova, styled as a "Complaint" alleging that an IJ in the underlying proceedings committed numerous errors and that the removal proceedings violated his constitutional rights, the circuit court dismisses the "Complaint" for lack of subject matter jurisdiction where: 1) because petitioner's "Complaint" sought review of the IJ's removal order, "sole and exclusive means for judicial review" was vested in the circuit court; 2) the time limits for filing a petition for review are mandatory and jurisdictional and not subject to equitable tolling, and thus the complaint was untimely; and 3) petitioner's inability to seek habeas review of his removal order did not violate the Suspension Clause, as the REAL ID Act is an adequate substitute for habeas review. 12/24/2008

Ouk v. Mukasey
(U.S. 1st Cir., Civil Procedure, Immigration Law) Petition for review order of removal is denied in part and dismissed in part for lack of jurisdiction where: 1) there was more than substantial evidence to support the finding that petitioner did not show exceptional circumstances for his untimely motion to reopen; 2) the court lacks jurisdiction to review petitioner's claim that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) should have granted equitable tolling because the agency based its decision on the factual determination that petitioner had not exercised due diligence, which is a precondition to equitable tolling. 12/23/2008

Salazar-Luviano v. Mukasey
(U.S. 9th Cir., Criminal Law & Procedure, Immigration Law) Aiding and abetting an attempted escape from custody does not categorically qualify as an "obstruction of justice" crime, for purposes of constituting an aggravated felony within the meaning of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) section 101(a)(43)(S). 12/23/2008

Torres v. Mukasey
(U.S. 7th Cir., Immigration Law) Petition for review of a denial of Honduran native's application for asylum and related relief is granted where: 1) the IJ's credibility determination was tainted due to the IJ's improper conduct during the hearings at issue; and 2) there was not substantial evidence to support the IJ's conclusions. 12/23/2008

Valenzuela-Solari v. Mukasey
(U.S. 1st Cir., Immigration Law) Petition to review decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) finding petitioner removable for overstaying his visa and for falsely representing himself to be a U.S. citizen is denied over claims that: 1) the Immigration Judge (IJ) erred in relying on the testimony of the Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) officers and on petitioner's sworn statement because that evidence was unreliable due to petitioner's limited understanding of English; and 2) petitioner was not removable because even if he made what could be viewed as a false claim, petitioner recanted his false claim of citizenship. 12/22/2008

Mendoza v. Ruesga
(Cal. App., Civil Procedure, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Immigration Law, Injury And Tort Law, Remedies) In a matter of first impression involving claim against defendant-immigration consultant for violation of the immigration consultants act (ICA), breach of fiduciary duty and intentional infliction of emotional distress, judgment in favor of plaintiffs awarding them damages for breach of fiduciary duty, civil penalties, and attorney fees while barring recovery of treble damages and damages under unclean hands is reversed in part and affirmed in part where: 1) as a matter of law the unclean hands doctrine was inapplicable to plaintiffs' cause of action under the ICA because it was based on defendant's violation of statutes intended to protect consumers; 2) there is a right to a jury trial on an ICA cause of action for damages and the ICA specifically provides that a consumer may recover compensatory damages from an immigration consultant and allows for injunctive relief; and 3) conduct by an immigration consultant giving rise to relief under the ICA may also give rise to punitive damages for breach of fiduciary duty or intentional infliction of emotional distress. 12/16/2008