Case Summaries

Immigration Law

[02/03] Diaz Ruano v. Holder
On petition for review of a BIA decision that affirmed the decision of an immigration judge denying the petitioner's application for withholding of removal and protection from removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) based on claims that he would be subjected to persecution on account of his membership in the social groups of young males targeted by the criminal gangs in Guatemala for recruitment or because of opposition to gangs, and in the group of persons of perceived wealth returning from the United States, the petition is denied, where substantial evidence supported the determinations that: 1) the petitioner failed to show that it was more likely than not that, if removed to Guatemala, he would suffer persecution on account of his membership in a socially visible, sufficiently particular social group; and 2) the petitioner failed to establish that it was more likely than not that he would be subject to torture upon his return to Guatemala.

[02/02] US v. Rivera-Santana
In a sentencing challenge after the appellant was convicted of illegal reentry into the United States after being removed for a conviction of an aggravated felony, the sentencing court's judgment order is affirmed, where: 1) two upward departures in the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range, augmented by an upward variance of 90 months therefrom, were not procedurally unreasonable; and 2) the resulting sentence, which was the statutory maximum, was not substantively unreasonable.

[02/01] US v. Noriega-Perez
In a prosecution of a property owner stemming from his renting houses he owned near the United States-Mexico border to an alien smuggling organization knowing that they would be used as load houses to conceal and later transfer recently arrived aliens, the convictions are affirmed, where: 1) the strong circumstantial evidence presented at trial sufficed for the jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that non-testifying material witnesses were illegal aliens; 2) a reasonable jury could find sufficient specific evidence linking the defendant to intentionally aiding the cross-border transportation of the named material witnesses before they were dropped off in the United States.

[02/01] Phan v. Holder
In a case in which USCIS denied an application for naturalization on the grounds that the applicant could not show good moral character because he was convicted of an aggravated felony, the district court's grant of summary judgment is affirmed, where: 1) on its face, the appellant's conviction satisfied the statutory requirements for a "conviction" of an aggravated felony; 2) although a court set aside the conviction, it acted pursuant to rehabilitative goals, which do not control the use of the conviction in the immigration context.

[01/31] Guerrero v. Holder
In removal proceedings in which a Salvadoran national requested asylum and withholding of removal based on mistreatment suffered at the hands of FMLN guerillas, the petition for review of the BIA's decision upholding the immigration judge's denial of asylum and withholding of removal is denied, where the petitioner failed to surmount the standard of review with respect to his claim of past persecution.

[01/31] Arevalo-Giron v. Holder
In removal proceedings in which a Guatemalan national applied for withholding of removal, asserting that if returned to Guatemala, she would face persecution on account of her status as either a single woman with perceived wealth or a former "child of war," the petition for review of a BIA decision affirming the immigration judge's denial of relief is denied, where: 1) the BIA was correct in finding that any potential hardship faced by the petitioner in Guatemala would be unrelated to her membership in either of the purported social groups; 2) the petitioner could not establish past persecution; 3) the situation described in the country conditions report was not so pervasive as to compel the conclusion that the petitioner was likely to suffer harm upon her return to her homeland; and 4) the petitioner did not show any connection between the violence that she feared and the government of Guatemala.

[01/30] US v. Casasola
In a prosecution of a Guatemalan citizen for illegal reentry into the United States after removal, the district court's denial of a motion to dismiss the criminal information is affirmed, and the sentence is affirmed, where: 1) the defendant did not obtain derivative citizenship when his father was naturalized before the defendant turned eighteen but his mother, still married to the father, was not; 2) the statute as it existed at the relevant time did not deny equal protection, because it did not permit automatic derivative citizenship when one parent having joint custody was naturalized, but rather required the custodial parent, upon naturalization, to have sole legal custody; and 3) a sentencing guideline amendment that deleted the criminal history "recency" points used to calculate the defendant's criminal history category was not retroactive, and the sentence was neither substantively nor procedurally unreasonable.

[01/30] Prudencio v. Holder
In removal proceedings against a lawful permanent resident who was convicted of contributing to the delinquency of a minor in violation of Virginia Code section 18.2-371, a misdemeanor, the petition for review of a BIA decision dismissing an appeal from an immigration judge's decision is granted and the immigration judge's order of removal is vacated, where: 1) the Attorney General's approach to determining whether a conviction is for a crime involving moral turpitude, set forth in Matter of Silva-Trevino, 24 I&N Dec. 687 (A.G. 2008), is not an authorized exercise of the Attorney General's authority under Chevron; and 2) under the categorical and modified categorical approaches, DHS did not satisfy its burden of showing that the conviction qualified as a crime involving moral turpitude.

[01/27] Tyson v. Holder
In removal proceedings against a returning lawful permanent resident who was convicted in 1980 for importation of a controlled substance pursuant to a stipulated facts agreement, the BIA's decision upholding the immigration judge's denial of section 212(c) relief is reversed, where: 1) the stipulated facts trial entitled the appellant to invoke the St. Cyr line of cases allowing for retroactive section 212(c) relief even though she did not enter a traditional guilty plea; and 2) the record established the appellant's objectively reasonable reliance on the continued availability of section 212(c) relief.

[01/26] de Carvalho-Frois v. Holder
In a case seeking judicial review of a BIA order upholding an immigration judge's denial of asylum for failure to establish either past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution, the petition for review is denied, where the petitioner's claimed social group--witnesses to a serious crime whom the Brazilian government is unwilling or unable to protect--is too amorphous to satisfy the requirements for social visibility.

[01/26] Turkson v. Holder
In removal proceedings in which the immigration judge's decision deferring removal was reversed by the BIA, petition for review is granted and the BIA decision is vacated, where the BIA erred in reviewing the immigration judge's factual findings under the de novo standard of review instead of under the clearly erroneous standard prescribed by its governing regulations.

Read More