crimmigration.com

The intersection of criminal law and immigration law

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

BIA: Cuban adjustment of status constitutes admission for § 237 removal purposes

The BIA held that an individual whose status was adjusted from parolee to lawful permanent resident pursuant to the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act of 1966 was dmitted for purposes of removal under INA § 237(a). Matter of Espinosa Guillot, 25 I&N Dec. 653 (BIA 2011) (Grant, Malphrus, and Mullane, Board members). Board member Grant wrote the panel’s decision.

This case involves a Cuban citizen who was paroled into the United States and adjusted his status under the CRAA (often referred to as the Cuban Adjustment Act or CAA). Guillot subsequently was convicted of trafficking in cannabis and charged with being removable for having been convicted of a controlled substances offense, INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i), and an aggravated felony, INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii).

Because § 237(a) applies only to individuals “in and admitted to the United States,” the IJ was required to determine whether Guillot’s adjustment pursuant to the CAA constituted an admission. The IJ determined that Guillot had not been admitted and, therefore, he was not subject to removal under § 237(a). Matter of Espinosa Guillot, 25 I&N Dec. at 653.

To reach this conclusion, the IJ relied on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit’s holding that an individual whose status was adjusted to permanent residence was not barred from seeking a waiver of inadmissibility under INA § 212(h). Lanier v. U.S. Attorney General, 631 F.3d 1363, 1365-66 (11th Cir. 2011). Borrowing from the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Martinez v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 532, 544 (5th Cir. 2008), the Lanier Court held that the § 212(h) bar that applies to an individual “who has previously been admitted to the United States as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence,” does not apply to an individual who obtained LPR status through adjustment. Lanier, 631 F.3d at 1365-66.

The BIA did not disagree with the Eleventh or Fifth Circuits’ reasoning in those cases. It did, however, explain that their reasoning is limited to the language of § 212(h). (I previously wrote about another BIA decision limiting the scope of Martinez). In doing so, the Board distinguished the language of the Cuban Adjustment Act. In contrast to the language of § 212(h), “the plain language of the [CAA] provides that an alien who has not otherwise been admitted may be deemed admitted for permanent residence by operation of adjustment of status.” Matter of Espinosa Guillot, 25 I&N Dec. at 655.

Accordingly, the BIA reversed the IJ’s determination: “we hold that the respondent was admitted to the United States and was therefore properly charged with removability under section 237(a) of the Act.” Matter of Espinosa Guillot, 25 I&N Dec. at 656.

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

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Posted by César on February 16, 2012 on 9:00 am 9 Comments
Filed Under: 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, 212(h), 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, adjustment of status, admission, waiver

Comments

  1. Pradeep Parashar says

    February 16, 2012 at 9:52 am

    This is an excellent discovery, otherwise nobody will ever know the secreat of the laws.

    Reply
  2. Ben Winograd says

    February 16, 2012 at 12:40 pm

    I wouldn’t say the Board “did not disagree” with Martinez and Lanier. The Board’s decision in Matter of Koljenovic is in direct conflict with Lanier, and it will presumably decline to follow Martinez if given the chance. The Board simply recognized that both Martinez and Lanier rested on the “unique” language of 212(h). Ironically, though, the Board’s decision completely undermines the rationale of Matter of Koljenovic. As Matter of Espinosa Guillot demonstrates, adhering to the statutory definition of “admitted” in 212(h) will *not* require it to do so in other statutory contexts if adherence to the definition would, in fact, create absurd results.

    Reply
  3. side effects of q10 coenzyme says

    June 20, 2012 at 4:02 am

    side effects of q10 coenzyme

    […]crImmigration.com: BIA: Cuban adjustment of status constitutes admission for § 237 removal purposes[…]

    Reply
  4. help for health anxiety says

    June 22, 2012 at 12:09 am

    help for health anxiety

    […]crImmigration.com: BIA: Cuban adjustment of status constitutes admission for § 237 removal purposes[…]

    Reply
  5. web site says

    June 22, 2012 at 5:06 am

    web site

    […]crImmigration.com: BIA: Cuban adjustment of status constitutes admission for § 237 removal purposes[…]

    Reply
  6. no deposit codes says

    April 5, 2013 at 6:35 pm

    no deposit codes

    crImmigration.com: BIA: Cuban adjustment of status constitutes admission for § 237 removal purposes

    Reply
  7. Oakley Whisker says

    July 19, 2013 at 11:31 am

    Oakley Whisker

    For hottest news you have to pay a quick visit web and on web I found this site as a most excellent site for latest updates.

    Reply
  8. Oakley Flak Jacket says

    July 26, 2013 at 10:27 am

    Oakley Flak Jacket

    crImmigration.com: BIA: Cuban adjustment of status constitutes admission for § 237 removal purposes

    Reply
  9. cheap ugg boots says

    December 26, 2013 at 12:59 pm

    cheap ugg boots

    ugg outlet store online reviews

    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

  • Uvalde massacre & immigration law aid
  • Mistakes aren’t reviewable, Supreme Court says
  • ICE prosecutorial discretion guidance
  • Supreme Court again considers ICE’s detention powers
  • Troubled contractor gets $180 million to hold young migrants
  • Chronicling Arizona’s Immigration Politics

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.