Habibi v. Holder (9th Cir. 9/14/2011) I would put this case under the “nice try” category. Immigration attorneys, especially the ones who mainly deal with appellate issues, can be very creative. Sometimes our creativity pays off. Other times, it doesn’t. The above case is an example of a cute idea that didn’t get too far.
Posts Tagged ‘cancellation of removal’
365-Day Sentence Considered One Year, Even if Served During Leap Year
October 7th, 2011 
Max Nuyen Immigration Judge May Not Request Corroborating Evidence For Convictions In Removal Hearings
January 15th, 2011 Max Nuyen Rosas-Castaneda v. Holder (9th Cir. 2011) This case illustrates the finer points between a conviction for a controlled substance violation and a conviction for an aggravated felony. In most circumstances, the differences are merely academic, because either type of conviction would render a person inadmissible, and therefore, not eligible for immigration benefits. However, in situations […]
Petty Offense Exception Applies to Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude
September 13th, 2010 Max Nuyen Matter of Heredia-Pedroza (B.I.A. 8/13/2010) In a ruling which is sure to bring sighs of relief to many affected persons, the BIA determined that the respondent may be eligible for cancellation of removal even though he had been convicted of a crime of moral turpitude, because the petty offense exception applies even to crimes involving […]
Posted in Deportation and Detention 
Tags: BIA, cancellation of removal, Matter of Pedroza, misdemeanor, moral turpitude, petty offense exception, shoplifting 
Comments Off on Petty Offense Exception Applies to Crimes Involving Moral TurpitudeSecond Minor Drug Possession Conviction Is Not Aggravated Felony for Immigration Purposes
June 17th, 2010 Max Nuyen Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder (U.S. Sup. Ct. 2010) In this case, the Supreme Court held that for purposes of cancellation of removal, an applicant must actually be convicted of an aggravated felony to be disqualified from seeking such relief. The case arose because the respondent, a lawful permanent resident, had been convicted in Texas of possessing […]
Cancellation of Removal Applicant Entitled to Full and Fair Hearing
June 8th, 2010 Max Nuyen Cruz Rendon v. Holder (9th Cir. 2010) In a harsh rebuke to a sitting immigration judge, the 9th Circuit ruled that the judge’s conduct deprived an applicant for cancellation of removal a full, fair, and impartial hearing. The applicant, Cruz Rendon, was a citizen of Mexico who entered the United States illegally in 1990. In […]
Special Rules Cancellation of Removal for Battered Spouses Available to Permanent Residents
March 16th, 2010 Max Nuyen Matter of A–M– (BIA 2009) In this case, the Board of Immigration Appeals considered the question of whether or not a lawful permanent resident is eligible to apply for special rule cancellation of removal for battered spouses. There are certain aspects of U.S. immigration law which are purely driven by humanitarian considerations. One of these […]
Posted in Deportation and Detention, Family Based Tags: abused spouse, battered spouse, BIA, cancellation of removal, Matter of A-- M--, removal, special rule Comments Off on Special Rules Cancellation of Removal for Battered Spouses Available to Permanent ResidentsStepchild Qualifies As Relative for Purposes of Cancellation of Removal
December 15th, 2009 Max Nuyen Matter of Portillo-Gutierrez (BIA 2009) The Board of Immigration Appeals ruled that a stepchild meets the definition of a child for purposes of qualifying for cancellation of removal. This should come as a relief to many persons who are now in the country unlawfully, because cancellation of removal is one of the few avenues for […]
Posted in Deportation and Detention, Family Based Tags: cancellation of removal, child, exceptional and extremely unusual, Matter of Portillo-Gutierrez, qualifying relative Comments Off on Stepchild Qualifies As Relative for Purposes of Cancellation of RemovalNinth Circuit Reaffirms Imputation of Parent’s LPR Status for Minor Child
September 30th, 2009 Max Nuyen Mercado-Zazueta v. Holder (9th Cir.) In this case, the 9th Circuit decided the question of whether a parent’s status as a lawful permanent resident may be imputed to an unemancipated minor child residing with that parent, for purposes of satisfying the five-year permanent residence requirement for cancellation of removal under § 240A(a)(1) of the Immigration […]