crimmigration.com

The intersection of criminal law and immigration law

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

9th Circuit: Physical Presence Stops Accruing Upon Receipt of Notice to Appear

By Sarah Flinn A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit followed the trend set by the Second, Fourth, Sixth, and Seventh Circuits in determining that continuous physical presence for purposes of cancellation of removal stops accruing when the petitioner receives a Notice to Appear (NTA), regardless of whether the notice includes a date and location for the removal hearing. Moscoso-Castellanos v. Lynch, No. 12-72693, 2015 WL 5933279, at *3 (9th Cir. Oct. 13, 2015). Jorge Mario Moscoso-Castellanos, a native and citizen of Guatemala, arrived in the United States [...]

Posted by César on January 14, 2016 on 4:00 am Leave a Comment
Filed Under: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, cancellation of removal, guest blogger, stop-time rule

BIA: NTA stops time for cancellation of removal only if it’s used to launch removal proceedings

The BIA recently returned to a critical and deceptively complicated part of cancellation of removal, the stop-time rule, with a fairly narrow but important decision. Matter of Ordaz, 26 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 2015). Migrants are eligible for relief from removal if they can meet certain durational requirements, among other criteria. Lawful permanent residents must be able to show that they have continuously resided in the United States for at least seven years. INA § 240A(a)(2). Other migrants must show that they have been continuously physically present in the United States for at least ten [...]

Posted by César on August 27, 2015 on 4:00 am Leave a Comment
Filed Under: Board of Immigration Appeals, cancellation of removal, stop-time rule

Tx Ct Crim App: Right to counsel properly waived despite not being told about deportation possibility

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, the state’s highest criminal court, held that a person who waived his right to an attorney in a misdemeanor drug possession prosecution did not do so impermissibly despite not having been told that he might be deportable upon conviction. State v. Guerrero, No. PD-1258-12, slip op. (Tex. Crim. App. June 5, 2013) (Cochran, Keller, Price, Womack, Johnson, Keasler, Hervey, and Alcala, JJ.). Judge Cochran wrote the court’s opinion. This case presents like the picture of interior immigration enforcement in the age of crImmigration law. The defendant entered [...]

Posted by César on July 16, 2013 on 9:00 am 14 Comments
Filed Under: § 212(c), cancellation of removal, conviction, habeas, local immigration policing, Padilla v. Kentucky, post-conviction relief, state court, stop-time rule, Texas state court, waiver

10 Cir: Apple can lead to deportation if it’s 2nd marijuana conviction because 2 convictions arising from same activity aren’t ‘single offense’ under controlled substances deportation ground

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that the phrase “single offense” in the controlled substances offense basis for deportation, INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i), does not apply to more than one drug crime. Martinez-Mercado v. Holder, No. 11-9535, slip op. (10th Cir. July 27, 2012) (Kelly, Murphy, and Holmes, JJ.). Judge Murphy wrote the panel’s decision. This case involved an individual who became an LPR in 2002 and was convicted in 2007 of possession of marijuana, Utah Code Ann. § 58-37-8(2)(a)(i), and possession of drug paraphernalia (an apple, as described below), Utah Code Ann. § [...]

Posted by César on January 15, 2013 on 9:00 am 8 Comments
Filed Under: 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, cancellation of removal, controlled substance offense, stop-time rule

BIA: Service of NTA triggers cancellation of removal stop-time rule even if hearing time or date not provided

The BIA held that the stop-time rule that stops accrual of continuous physical presence or continuous residence for purposes of cancellation of removal is triggered upon service of a notice to appear (NTA) even if the NTA does not state the time or date of the removal hearing. Matter of Camarillo, 25 I&N Dec. 644 (BIA 2011) (Miller, Malphrus, and Mullane, Board members). Board member Malphrus wrote the panel’s decision. This case involved an LPR who was served an NTA that stated “To be set” instead of a particular date and time for a hearing. Matter of Camarillo, 25 I&N Dec. at 644. [...]

Posted by César on February 7, 2012 on 9:00 am 1 Comment
Filed Under: Board of Immigration Appeals, cancellation of removal, stop-time rule

Subscribe


Recent Posts

  • Supreme Court says Biden can end MPP
  • 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

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.