Here is the visa bulletin for March 2011. This bulletin is published by the Department of State and it summarizes the availability of visas as of March. The availability changes monthly and lets you know when your visa number becomes available. It also gives you an idea of the length of time you may have to wait if you have not already applied for a visa.
Here is the visa bulletin for April 2011. This bulletin is published by the Department of State and it summarizes the availability of visas as of April. The availability changes monthly and lets you know when your visa number becomes available. It also gives you an idea of the length of time you may have to wait if you have not already applied for a visa.
When a non U.S. citizen obtains a greencard (becomes a lawful permanent resident (LPR)), he or she gains many rights not available to other non U.S. citizens. However, an LPR can “abandon” that status and not even know it. If an LPR remains outside of the United States for more than a year, this will be considered an abandonment of the LPR status. 8 C.F.R. 211.1(a)(2). Also, the LPR status may be abandoned in certain situations if the LPR leaves the United States for less than a year. If you are an LPR and plan on leaving the United States, you should consult an experienced immigration attorney to protect your LPR status.
Florida lawmakers proposed a new bill that would require employers to verify potential employees immigration status. The bill would also allow law enforcement to obtain the identify and legal status of individuals in criminal investigations. Critics of the proposed law state that the Arizona type immigration bill would reflect poorly on the state of Florida, a tourist dependent state. Critics also argue that the bill will promote racial profiling and that it is unnecessary because illegal immigrants are not taking jobs away from U.S. citizens. It remains to be seen whether the proposed law will be enacted.
The Florida Third District Court of Appeal recently ruled in Hernandez v. State, that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky should not be applied retroactively. The Padilla Court held that a criminal defendant who entered a plea to a criminal charge, but was not properly advised, or advised at all, of the immigration consequenses of his or her plea, could withdraw his plea to the criminal charge if certain conditions were met. However, the Padilla Court did not specifically state whether this applied to cases prior to the Padilla decision (March 2010). The 3rd DCA stated in Hernandez that it appeared that the Padilla Court meant for the decision to be retroactive and thus apply to final convictions prior to March 31, 2010, but because the Court did not specifically state that the decision should be applied retroactively, the 3rd DCA refused to hold that it did, in fact, apply retroactively. The 3rd DCA did certify the issue to the Florida Supreme Court.
This decision will ultimately be decided by the Florida Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court. It has far reaching consequenses for non U.S. citizens who have entered pleas of guilty or no contest and been sentenced in a criminal case. If the Florida Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court agrees with the 3rd DCA, immigrant clients who have relied on the incorrect advice of their criminal lawyer in pleading to a criminal charge, and now are facing deportation because of that advice, will have no remedy to go back and challenge that criminal conviction.
The Board of Immigration Appeals narrowed the list of immigrants that can be deported in their decision, Matter of Alyazji, 25 I&N Dec. 397 (BIA 2011). The law states that an alien can be deported if he or she commits a crime involving moral turpitude less than 5 years after being “admitted’ into the United States. The question that lingers is what is the relevant date of admission? The entry date of the alien into the United States? What if the alien becomes a lawful permanent resident? Does that restart the relevant date of admission? Well, the Board answered this last question in the negative. How does this affect a non U.S. citizen?
Consider this example. John is a citizen of Germany. He entered the United States in 1995 on a nonimmigrant visa. In 2005, he became a lawful permanent resident. In 2007, he committed a crime involving moral turpitude (for example, theft or fraud). Prior to Alyazji, the BIA’s former relevant decision suggested that when John adjusted his status to become a lawful permanent resident, he started his “admission” all over again, and therefore any crime of moral turpitude for the next 5 years (until 2010) would make him deportable. Under Alyazji, John would not be deportable because he committed the crime of moral turpitude more than 5 years from his “admission” (1995), and John’s adjustment of status to become a lawful permanent resident no longer affects that admission date, under Alyazji.
Did you know that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) can deny your N-400 Application to become a U.S. Citizen if you are a male that failed to register for the Selective Service between your 18th birthday and your 26th birthday? Many of our clients had no idea about their obligation to register with the selective service. Find out if you are required to register here. If you are a male between 18 and 26 and you are required to register, you may do so online at www.sss.gov. If you are a male that was required to register, but didn’t, and you are 26 or older, consult with an immigration attorney before you apply for citizenship.
Baker County’s new detention facility is now hosting satellite video removal hearings. The Judge and government attorney are still located in the closest immigration court in Orlando. However, through video conferencing, the client and attorney may appear by video at the Baker County Detention Facility, instead of the client being transported to Orlando for the proceedings.
In Padilla v. Kentucky, 599 U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 1473 (2010), the United States Supreme Court held that when a non U.S. citizen is either inproperly advised or not advised of the immigration consequences of the plea of guilty or no contest to a criminal charge, the conviction may be overturned. So what does this mean for you? If the Government is attempting to remove or deport you based on a criminal conviction, you may be able to challenge that criminal conviction, even though you pled guilty or no contest, and even though it happened a long time ago. If you were not properly advised of what impact your plea to the criminal case would have on your ability to stay in this country, you may be able to challenge that conviction, thanks to Padilla.
Florida Immigration Lawyer Blog
