| Virtual Law Library |
Volume 26
MONTOYA-SILVA, 26 I&N Dec. 123 (BIA 2013) |
ID 3781 (PDF) |
A parent’s lawful permanent resident status and residence in the United States cannot be imputed to an unemancipated minor for purposes of establishing the child’s eligibility for cancellation of removal under section 240A(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a) (2006). Matter of Escobar, 24 I&N Dec. 231 (BIA 2007); and Matter of Ramirez-Vargas, 24 I&N Dec. 599 (BIA 2008), reaffirmed.
B-R-, 26 I&N Dec. 119 (BIA 2013) |
ID 3780 (PDF) |
An alien who is a citizen or national of more than one country but has no fear of persecution in one of those countries does not qualify as a “refugee” under section 101(a)(42) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42) (2006), and is ineligible for asylum.
BUTT, 26 I&N Dec.108 (BIA 2013) |
ID 3779 (PDF) |
(1) For purposes of establishing eligibility for adjustment of status under section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i) (2006), an alien seeking to be"grandfathered" must be the beneficiary of an application for labor certification that was "approvable when filed."
(2) An alien will be presumed to be the beneficiary of a "meritorious in fact" labor certification if the application was "properly filed" and "non-frivolous" and if no apparent bars to approval of the labor certification existed at the time it was filed.
CENTRAL CALIFORNIA LEGAL SERVICES, INC., 26 I&N Dec. 105 (BIA 2013) |
ID 3778 (PDF) |
A recognized organization’s application for initial accreditation of a proposed representative must show that the individual has recently completed at least one formal training course that was designed to give new practitioners a solid overview of the fundamentals of immigration law and procedure.
ORTEGA-LOPEZ, 26 I&N Dec. 99 (BIA 2013) |
ID 3777 (PDF) |
The offense of sponsoring or exhibiting an animal in an animal fighting venture in violation of 7U.S.C. § 2156(a)(1) (2006) is categorically a crime involvingmoral turpitude.
G-K-, 26 I&N Dec. 88 (BIA 2013) |
ID 3776 (PDF) |
(1) The United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime, Nov. 15, 2000, 2225 U.N.T.S. 209 (“UNTOC”), which is intended to help protect witnesses of transnational organized crime from retaliation and intimidation, does not provide an independent basis for relief from removal in immigration proceedings.
(2) The objectives of the UNTOC are advanced in the United States through existing immigration laws and regulations, including the S, T, and U nonimmigrant visas and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted and opened for signature Dec. 10, 1984, G.A. Res. 39/46. 39 U.N. GAORSupp.No. 51, at 197,U.N.Doc.A/RES/39/708 (1984) (entered into force June 26, 1987; for the United States Apr. 18, 1988).
(3) The Board of Immigration Appeals and the Immigration Judges do not have the authority to rule on the constitutionality of the statutes they administer and therefore lack jurisdiction to address a claimthat the statute barring relief for particularly serious crimes is void for vagueness.
CORTES MEDINA, 26 I&N Dec. 79 (BIA 2013) |
ID 3775 (PDF) |
The offense of indecent exposure in violation of section 314(1) of the California Penal Code, which includes the element of lewd intent, is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude.
SANCHEZ-LOPEZ, 26 I&N Dec. 71 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3774 (PDF) |
The offense of stalking in violation of section 646.9 of the California Penal Code is “a crime of stalking” under section 237(a)(2)(E)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(E)(i) (2006).
VALENZUELA-FELIX, 26 I&N Dec. 53 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3773 (PDF) |
When theDepartment ofHomeland Security paroles a returning lawful permanent resident for prosecution, it need not have all the evidence to sustain its burden of proving that the alien is an applicant for admission but may ordinarily rely on the results of a subsequent prosecution to meet that burden in later removal proceedings.
M-H-, 26 I&N Dec. 46 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3772 (PDF) |
The holding in Matter of N-A-M-, 24 I&N Dec. 336 (BIA 2007), that an offense need not be an aggravated felony to be considered a particularly serious crime for purposes of barring asylum or withholding of removal, should be applied to cases within the jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
SANCHEZ-HERBERT, 26 I&N Dec. 43 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3771 (PDF) |
Where an alien fails to appear for a hearing because he has departed the United States, termination of the pending proceedings is not appropriate if the alien received proper notice of the hearing and is removable as charged.
DAVEY, 26 I&N Dec. 37 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3770 (PDF) |
(1) For purposes of section 237(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) (2006), the phrase “a single offense involving possession for one’s own use of thirty grams or less of marijuana” calls for a circumstance-specific inquiry into the character of the alien’s unlawful conduct on a single occasion, not a categorical inquiry into the elements of a single statutory crime.
(2) An alien convicted of more than one statutory crime may be covered by the exception to deportability for an alien convicted of “a single offense involving possession for one’s own use of thirty grams or less ofmarijuana” if all the alien’s crimeswere closely related to or connected with a single incident in which the alien possessed 30 grams or less of marijuana for his or her own use, provided that none of those crimeswas inherently more serious than simple possession.
M-Z-M-R-, 26 I&N Dec. 28 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3769 (PDF) |
(1) In assessing an asylum applicant’s ability to internally relocate, an Immigration Judge must determine whether the applicant could avoid future persecution by relocating to another part of the applicant’s country of nationality and whether, under all the circumstances, it would be reasonable to expect the applicant to do so.
(2) For an applicant to be able to internally relocate safely, there must be an area of the country where the circumstances are substantially better than those giving rise to a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of the original claim.
(3) If an applicant is able to internally relocate, an Immigration Judge should balance the factors identified at 8 C.F.R. § 1208.13(b)(3) (2012) in light of the applicable burden of proof to determine whether it would be reasonable under all the circumstances to expect the applicant to relocate.
LEAL, 26 I&N Dec. 20 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3768 (PDF) |
The offense of “recklessly endangering another person with a substantial risk of imminent death” in violation of section 13-1201(A) of the Arizona Revised Statutes is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude under the definition in Matter of Silva-Trevino, 24 I&N Dec. 687 (A.G. 2008), even though Arizona law defines recklessness to encompass a subjective ignorance of risk resulting from voluntary intoxication.
Y-N-P-, 26 I&N Dec. 10 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3767 (PDF) |
An applicant for special rule cancellation of removal under section 240A(b)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2) (2006), cannot utilize a waiver of inadmissibility under section 212(h) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(h) (2006), to overcome the section 240A(b)(2)(A)(iv) bar resulting from inadmissibility under section 212(a)(2).
E-A-, 26 I&N Dec. 1 (BIA 2012) |
ID 3766 (PDF) |
(1) In assessing whether there are serious reasons for believing that an applicant for asylum or withholding of removal has committed a serious nonpolitical crime, an Immigration Judge should balance the seriousness of the criminal acts against the political aspect of the conduct to determine whether the criminal nature of the acts outweighs their political character.
(2) When considered together, the applicant’s actions as a member of a group that burned passenger buses and cars, threwstones, and disrupted the economic activity of merchants in the market, while pretending to be from the opposition party, reached the level of serious criminal conduct that, when weighed against its political nature, constituted a serious nonpolitical crime.
