crimmigration.com

The intersection of criminal law and immigration law

Archive

After regularly updating crimmigration.com from January 2009 until November 2022, I have stopped doing so. I hope you continue to benefit from the blog as an archive. For up-to-date information about my work, visit ccgarciahernandez.com. – César

  • Home
  • About César
  • Articles
  • Books
  • Talks & Media

BIA: Mandatory detention applies only if released from custody for allegedly removable offense after October 8, 1998

In a published decision released last week, the BIA held that the mandatory detention provision, INA § 236(c), applies only to individuals released from non-DHS custody after October 8, 1998 and only if that custody was for an offense listed in § 236(c)(1)(A)-(D). Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. 267 (BIA 2010) (Adkins-Blanch, Guendelsberger, and King). Board member Adkins-Blanch wrote the decision; King is a temporary Board member.

This case involved an individual who was detained after being arrested and charged with assault on June 8, 2002 and June 30, 2009. Both charges were dismissed. Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. at 268. Without a conviction these charges could not serve as the basis of removal.

Instead, DHS placed Garcia Arreola in removal proceedings as a result of a March 31, 1989 conviction for possession of a controlled substance. Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. at 268. DHS alleged that this conviction rendered Garcia Arreola removable under INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i) for having been convicted of a controlled substance offense.

Only two years ago, the BIA held in Matter of Saysana, 24 I&N Dec. 602 (BIA 2008), “that the language of section 236(c)(1) of the Act does not support limiting the non-DHS custodial setting to post-TPCR criminal custody tied to the offenses enumerated in the statute.” Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. at 269. TPCR refers to the Transition Period Custody Rules that expired on October 8, 1998. TPCR essentially gave the federal government two years to implement § 236(c). Under Matter of Saysana, a person was mandatorily detained even if released from custody after October 8, 1998 for something that could not serve as the basis of removable—for example, an arrest that did not turn into a conviction or a conviction for a non-removable offense—so long as there existed a removable offense at any time.

The federal courts never embraced Matter of Saysana. As the BIA acknowledged in Matter of Garcia Arreola, the federal courts nearly uniformly rejected Matter of Saysana. Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. at 268. It appears that DHS eventually came to dislike Matter of Saysana as well. According to the Matter of Garcia Arreola opinion, “DHS asks that we adopt this more narrow reading of the statutory language.” Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. at 271. I have not been able to track down the DHS brief so I have to take the Board’s word on this.

Likely influenced by overwhelming repudiation of Matter of Saysana, the BIA has now rejected that analysis too. In the Board’s words, “we now withdraw from Matter of Saysana…and now hold that section 236(c) of the Act requires mandatory detention of a criminal alien only if he or she is released from non-DHS custody after the expiration of the TPCR and only where there has been a post-TPCR release that is directly tied to the basis for detention under sections 236(c)(1)(A)-(D) of the Act.” Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. at 269.

In effect, this means that the mandatory detention provision only applies to a person who is a) released from criminal custody after October 8, 1998 and b) only if the person was in custody at this time for an offense that is listed in § 236(c). Section 236(c) in turn references any offense included in §§ 212(a)(2), 237(a)(2)(A)(ii), 237(a)(2)(A)(iii), 237(a)(2)(B), 237(a)(2)(C), 237(a)(2)(D), 237(a)(2)(A)(i) if the person received a term of imprisonment of at least one year, 212(a)(3)(B), or 237(a)(4)(B).

Since Garcia Arreola was in custody as a result of the assault charges that were dismissed and that therefore could not constitute offenses listed in § 236(c), the mandatory detention provision does not apply to him.

  • Share via Facebook
  • Share via LinkedIn
  • Share via Twitter
  • Share via Email

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Posted by César on June 28, 2010 on 10:34 am 7 Comments
Filed Under: Board of Immigration Appeals, bond, mandatory detention

Comments

  1. cocotte saveur says

    September 25, 2012 at 3:27 pm

    cocotte saveur

    crImmigration.com: BIA: Mandatory detention applies only if released from custody for allegedly removable offense after October 8, 1998

    Reply
  2. http://www.paydayday.co.uk/ says

    January 13, 2013 at 12:01 am

    http://www.paydayday.co.uk/

    crImmigration.com: BIA: Mandatory detention applies only if released from custody for allegedly removable offense after October 8, 1998

    Reply
  3. payday loans says

    May 4, 2013 at 1:49 am

    payday loans

    Hi! Your article rocks too as becoming a reputable wonderful fully grasp!

    Reply
  4. FakE OaklEy Big TacO says

    May 10, 2013 at 1:25 pm

    FakE OaklEy Big TacO

    Have a excellent day!I’m very pleased when see your post.I quite approve of your views on politics.I will continue to notice on your blog.I affirm that the future I will see more about your good views.

    Reply
  5. Fake Oakleys For Sale says

    July 15, 2013 at 7:18 pm

    Fake Oakleys For Sale

    What a video it is! Actually remarkable and nice quality, please upload more video clips having such nice quality. Thanks.

    Reply
  6. Oakley Big Taco Sunglasses says

    July 29, 2013 at 6:04 am

    Oakley Big Taco Sunglasses

    crImmigration.com: BIA: Mandatory detention applies only if released from custody for allegedly removable offense after October 8, 1998

    Reply
  7. garcinia cambogia extract says

    March 29, 2014 at 12:09 pm

    garcinia cambogia extract

    crImmigration.com: BIA: Mandatory detention applies only if released from custody for allegedly removable offense after October 8, 1998

    Reply

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Subscribe


Recent Posts

  • Pelosi attacker reportedly Canadian overstayer
  • Biden marijuana pardon meets immigration law & fizzles
  • California private prison ban is illegal, 9th Circuit says
  • Citizenship is complicated
  • Supreme Court says Biden can end MPP
  • Uvalde massacre & immigration law aid

Search

Social Media

Blawg 100 Honoree

The information contained on these pages must not be considered legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. This work by www.crImmigration.com is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.