Florida Immigration Lawyer Blog

Coptic Christians Across the Middle East and North Africa face Unspeakable Violence

Published on: February 18, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

Whatever you call the Islamic State, ISIL, IS, or ISIS, everyone can agree that they commit horrible atrocities and brutal terroristic acts in multiple countries across the Middle East and North Africa. Their beheadings of Western and Asian Journalists on video were bad enough. Then they burned a Jordanian pilot alive as if we were still living in the middle ages. But their most recent despicable horror captured on video in an effort to scare the West and recruit more murderers was the torture and throat-slitting of 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians kidnapped in Libya.

Anyone who has seen or heard of this horrid tale should be appalled that these innocent men were clearly targeted, tortured and killed because of their Christian faith. Thankfully, Pope Francis spoke out to decry these despicable acts of religious persecution and torture. However, it is clear that no one of Christian faith is safe in any country in the Middle East or Northern Africa.

The United States has very strong immigration laws that prevent anyone from being deported to a country where they will be tortured or killed. In many circumstances, the U.S. will grant religious refugees lawful immigration status in the United States and even provide them with lawful permanent residence. Christians living in the Middle East and North Africa and more importantly, Christians in the United States who are from countries in the Middle East and North Africa have a very strong claim that if they return to their home countries they will be harmed, persecuted, tortured or killed because of their religion.

Two New Published Board of Immigration Appeals Decisions Regarding Aggravated Felonies and Deriving Citizenship

Published on: February 17, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

The Board of Immigration Appeals recently published two new cases. Matter of Chairez discusses how Immigration Judges and the Board will employ the modified categorical approach as it applies to whether criminal statutes are divisible. Matter of Cross discusses who is considered a legitimated child for the purposes of deriving U.S. citizenship in countries that have removed the legal difference between children born in or out of wedlock. I have summarize each case below.

Matter of Chairez, 26 I&N Dec. 478 (BIA 2015); The Board held the divisibility analysis for a criminal statute is subject to the interpretation of the Circuit Court decisions in the jurisdiction where the removal proceedings take place. The Board recognized that their decision in Matter of Chairez, 26 I&N Dec. 349 (BIA 2014) is still good law and the Board will follow the Descamps v. U.S., 133 S.Ct. 2276 (2013) guidance for how to apply the divisibility analysis of the categorical approach. However, in Circuits where the Courts have interpreted Descamps differently than the Board has, the Board will follow that divisibility anaysis of that Circuit. In footnote 3, the Board identified that two CIrcuits (the Fourth and Eleventh) follow the Chairez divisibility analysis, while three (First, Third and Tenth) use a different analysis, and there is confusion in the NInth as to what they use.

Matter of Cross, 26 I&N Dec. 485 (BIA 2015); The Board held that for the purposes of a citizenship derivation analysis, a child has been “legitimated” by their biological parent if the jurisdiction in which they were born or previously lived eliminated the legal distinctions between children born in or our of wedlock. This case eliminated the rule that the subsequent marriage of the biological parents was the only way to legitimate a child born out of wedlock in Jamaica.

Cuban-American politicians from both parties want to see changes to the Cuban Adjustment Act.

Published on: February 13, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

President Obama has been all over the news recently talking about how the U.S. has begun normalizing relations with Cuba and the communist Castro regime. Many people in the U.S. think that decision is long over due, but many Cuban-Americans on both sides of the political aisle do not support the President’s Actions.

I have blogged before about the immigration changes that may come about with a full normalization of diplomatic relations with Cuba, and these changes are not good for Cuban immigrants. See https://www.floridaimmigrationlawyerblog.com/2014/12/normalizing_diplomatic_relatio.html

&

When can a sock get you deported?

Published on: February 11, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

Moones Mellouli came to the United States legally and became a lawful permanent resident. He went to college and attained multiple advanced educational degrees and became a professor. In 2009 he was arrested for DUI and the police found Adderall pills in his sock. Adderall is a drug that requires a prescription and is a federally controlled substance.

Professor Mellouli managed to avoid a conviction for illegally possessing the Adderall, which, given his immigration status, would have definitely made him removable under INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i) for having been convicted of an offense relating to a controlled substance. Rather than a conviction for possessing the Adderall illegally, he managed to plead to a lesser offense, possession of drug paraphernalia, more specifically, the sock in which he illegally stored and concealed the Adderall.

Yes, you read that correctly, not only is it a crime to illegally possess a controlled substance, but in most states, it is also illegal to possess any object that a person uses or intends to use to:

Just because you have been outside the U.S. for more than a year does not mean you abandoned your Green Card.

Published on: February 9, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

When a non-citizen is a lawful permanent resident (LPR), they are usually allowed to leave the U.S. and return almost as easily as a citizen. There are certain circumstances when LPRs who are returning to the U.S. will be treated like other non-citizens. Those situations include when the LPR has a criminal conviction that makes them inadmissible, they left the U.S. to engage in criminal activity and when they are outside of the U.S. for more than one year.

In that third situation, often times the CBP officer at the airport will ask you why you were outside of the U.S. for so long and sometimes try to convince you to sign a Form I-407 Abandonment of Lawful Permanent Resident Status. DON’T DO IT! It is the government’s burden to prove that you abandoned your LPR status, by signing the form, you are admitting they are correct and you will likely lose your green card. There is much more analysis involved in whether you abandoned your green card then just being outside of the U.S. for more than a year.

If you find yourself in that situation, don’t sign the I-407, tell the officers you want to keep your green card and see an Immigration Judge. They will likely send you to Deferred Inspection, issue you a Form I-862 Notice to Appear and then send you to see an Immigration Judge. Even though CBP may have taken your actual green card, you are still a lawful permanent resident until an Immigration Judge issues a final order of your removal from the United States.

New Florida Case Illustrates need for Immigration Counsel in Criminal Court

Published on: February 5, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

A Florida court recently issued a decision that will have wide-ranging effects on how non-citizen criminal defendants approach their criminal cases. This decision makes it clear that every criminal defendant who is not a U.S. citizen should strongly consider hiring or consulting with an experienced immigration attorney before they even contemplate accepting a plea bargain in their criminal case. Of course, a non-citizen criminal defendant can also choose to hire a criminal defense attorney who is also an experienced immigration attorney, but those are hard to find.

In Rosario v. State, the Fourth District Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Ms. Rosario’s motion for post-conviction relief. Ms. Rosario is an undocumented immigrant who accepted a plea bargain and was convicted of petit theft. Ms. Rosario is married to a U.S. citizen and attempted to obtain lawful immigration status through that marriage, but was denied because of the conviction. The trial court and the appellate court denied her motion finding that because she was in the country without status already, she was facing deportation with or without a petit theft conviction.

This case illustrates the often confusing and complicated world of crimmigraiton. Even though a conviction may not directly lead to a non-citizen being deported from the country, it does not mean that the conviction will not have serious and negative immigration consequences. A criminal defense attorney has two choices when advising a non-citizen client about the immigration consequences of a plea. 1) They have a legal duty to accurately advise them of the consequences when they are truly clear or 2) they can advise the client to consult with an experienced immigration attorney before accepting a plea offer.

Two big reasons why you need both a criminal defense attorney and an immigration attorney in criminal court.

Published on: February 3, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

Every day thousands of people find themselves in criminal court having been accused of committing a crime. While criminal court can be a scary, intimidating and rough place to find oneself, it is particularly troublesome for criminal defendants who are not U.S. citizens. In addition to facing prison time or probation, non-U.S. citizens face something potentially much worse-deportation. In criminal court, defendants have a constitutional right to an attorney, so even poor criminal defendants will have counsel representing them–if they cannot afford to hire their own attorney. Regardless of whether a non-citizen defendant hires their own defense attorney or has one appointed, one of the first questions you should ask your lawyer is: what do you know about immigration law? If the answer is nothing or something close, you should immediately contact an experienced and qualified immigration attorney to help with your criminal case.

A non-citizen has so much more to worry about during their criminal case then does a U.S. citizen. There are so many more complications in a criminal case for a non-U.S. citizen, that one should not risk deportation by failing to consult with and hire an experienced immigration attorney who can advise you and your criminal defense attorney regarding your criminal case.

Here are some important reasons why every non-citizen criminal defendant should consult with and hire an experienced immigration attorney to assist in their criminal defense:

Push and Pull: the Forces that Drive Immigrants to Risk Everything to Come to the United States Part Three

Published on: January 29, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

In my first blog in this series, I explained that there are multiple causes to our immigration dilemma here in the United States. Some of these causes have their genesis in the U.S., and encourage people to risk it all to come here; I have coined these causes, pull factors. There are also strong influences present in almost every country in the world that encourage residents of those nations to want to leave, these are push factors. So in countries where there are strong push factors and similarly strong pull factors to the U.S., we see the largest migration of people seeking to enter the United States legally or otherwise.

Last time out I covered the strong push and pull factors that combined in Honduras, El Salvador & Guatemala to create the immigration and humanitarian crisis that we saw at the Southwest Border last summer.

This time I will cover two of our Caribbean neighbors where immigration to the U.S. is relatively very high. Cuba and Haiti send thousands of immigrants to the U.S. every year both with proper documents and without. Those who come over with authorization are usually coming to follow family members who are in the U.S. and have petitioned to bring their relatives here–pull factors. Those who are coming without authorization are usually fleeing poverty, persecution or violence–push factors.

Push and Pull: the Forces that Drive Immigrants to Risk Everything to Come to the United States Part Two

Published on: January 27, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

In my last blog I explained that there are multiple causes to our immigration dilemma here in the United States. Some of these causes have their genesis in the U.S., and encourage people to risk it all to come here, I have coined these causes, pull factors. There are also strong influences present in almost every country in the world that encourage residents of those nations to want to leave, these are push factors. So in countries where there are strong push factors and similarly strong pull factors to the U.S., we see the largest migration of people seeking to enter the United States legally or otherwise.

Here is a prime example of where strong push and pull factors combine to create the immigration and humanitarian crisis that we saw at the Southwest Border last summer.

Murder rates in three Central American countries, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras are outrageously high relative to the rest of the world. Accordingly, personal and financial security are extremely low in these three places. Those are very strong push factors; if you don’t know if you or your family has a future because you could be killed or kidnapped tomorrow, why go to school, why get an education, why go to work, why save up money just to lose it all to violence? People in these three countries have a strong incentive to want to leave and find a better life somewhere else. In addition to those strong push factors, there are multiple equally strong pull factors that encourage those fleeing Central America to choose to come to the U.S. rather than seeking safety and security in different country.

Push and Pull: the Forces that Drive Immigrants to Risk Everything to Come to the United States

Published on: January 23, 2015 | by Lasnetski Gihon Law

I have had the pleasure of giving immigration presentations to many different groups since I began practicing immigration law. These groups include lawyers on both sides of the issue, law enforcement, business leaders, and just regular Joes and Janes looking for insight into this divisive and emotional topic. My background as a state criminal prosecutor, federal immigration attorney, private attorney representing criminal defendants and immigrants facing deportation and finally as the husband of an immigrant has provided me with a unique and balanced perspective on the issue. I am neither pro-amnesty nor pro-deportation, I believe that we have to live by the laws that govern us all, but if we do not agree with the laws, we have a duty and obligation to change them. This is especially true when we have a broken system and broken laws that do not work–as is the case with our immigration system in the United States.

Estimates have our population of people in the U.S. without lawful immigration status somewhere north of 10 million. Regardless of your political beliefs as to what we should do with this large group–grant them amnesty or deport them all–we should all be able to agree that a legal system that has at least 10 million people actively violating it every day, is not working well.

There no single answer for how to fix our broken immigration system and as long as we live in the greatest country in the history of the world – the United States – people across the globe will risk their money and lives to come to the U.S., legally or not.