United States v. Garcia-Santana, more chipping away at the Almanza-Arenas / Young burden of proof issue.

Thursday, March 13th, 2014

When an alien applies for relief from removal, he has to prove eligibility for the relief according to INA § 240(c)(4)(A). For some forms of relief, principally voluntary departure and Cancellation of Removal for Certain Nonpermanent Residents, one of the requirements for relief is that the applicant not have had any convictions for crimes of moral turpitude. Whether a crime is a crime of moral turpitude is indubitably among the issues most addressed by courts of appeals. A big problem…

A big obstacle in the road of voluntary departure.

Sunday, June 30th, 2013

Sometimes I am kind of naive. Having just returned from a conference of immigration lawyers, I expected lots of discussion and commentary on some recent 9th Circuit cases. Instead, I heard nothing. I will address them here. Today, Corro-Barragan v. Holder,  decided on June 10, 2013. The case concerns voluntary departure. Voluntary departure is a common relief in removal proceedings. If one is granted voluntary departure, the person is allowed to leave the United States in lieu of being removed….

Two different outcomes on reopening based on vaguely distinguishable facts.

Sunday, July 24th, 2011

The courts of appeal perennially must deal with the issue of ineffective assistance of counsel. The issue is whether a case should be reopened if an attorney made a mistake in the case. The issue highlights a conflict between two conflicts in law in general – an interest in finality versus an interest in fairness. The interest in finality is that a case must end at some point. An alien has his day in court and he has his appeals….