Terezakis Law Firm, PLLC

Home » Blog » Cancellation Of Removal

ANOTHER GREEN CARD WIN AFTER TRIAL!

Posted on September 17, 2020 by George Terezakis

Keeping families together is the best part of the work we do! Today our client received his green card! He is now a legal permanent resident! We won non-permanent resident cancellation of removal for him following a trial. These cases are very difficult to win, because you must demonstrate the person would suffer: “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” in order to win. It is all about documenting the hardship, humanizing the client and his family, and presenting a compelling case. Thanks Lorena & Fabiola for all of your help! It’s all about teamwork!

CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL: TWO TRIALS, TWO SECOND CHANCES!

Posted on October 30, 2018 by George Terezakis

For lawful “permanent” residents, a criminal conviction often means deportation, banishment from this country and permanent separation from their family and friends. Fortunately, the immigration laws provide the opportunity to seek a “second chance” for long term permanent residents with certain convictions. The first battle is to demonstrate our client’s eligibility for this relief; once that battle is won, the client must have a trial: referred to as an “individual” or a “merits” hearing, before an Immigration Judge, with a prosecutor who represents ICE.

With certain narrow exceptions, a conviction for any controlled substance offense renders a non-citizen deportable. As a result of the opioid epidemic, and the widespread use of marijuana, many permanent residents will be placed into deportation-removal proceedings as the result of mistakes made, often many years in their past.

It is important to have an experienced criminal-immigration attorney defending these types of cases. Many immigration attorneys know how to prepare family based petitions, but lack trial experience. They feel nervous in the courtroom and are unfamiliar with how to try a case. Others may have experience in Immigration Court, but have no foundation in criminal law and so do not understand the complex interplay between criminal and immigration law. Only an advocate experienced in both criminal and immigration law can guide you through these troubled waters. The Terezakis Law Firm has this expertise. Last week we won 2 trials in 3 days and brought our clients home. Most importantly, we convinced the government to accept the Judges’ decisions as final, and so our clients were spared the expense and uncertainty of an appeal.

In the first case, our client stumbled into a major narcotics conspiracy after doing a friend “a favor” by buying him some cocaine. He was one of 20 persons named in a 36 count indictment, which appeared to charge each defendant as a “Major Narcotics Trafficker”. Careful review of the 100 paragraphs which described the criminal conduct in the single count which named our client, revealed he was never charged as a “Major Trafficker”, and that only 2 paragraphs even referenced him: one involved his call to arrange the purchase, and the other, the purchase. Had we not clarified the minor and tangential involvement of our client at the outset of the hearing, it is unlikely the Judge would have ever considered the favorable evidence: our client’s history of working on the books and paying his taxes; his close and supportive relationship with his U.S. citizen children; his ties to his community; his modest lifestyle; his good moral character and his genuine remorse for his misconduct.

Our second client, also a permanent resident, was nearly rendered ineligible for cancellation of removal after his prior attorney negotiated a plea to an offense which would have been classified as a drug trafficking aggravated felony. Our client sought our counsel after pleading guilty to possession of a controlled substance, because he feared he might be deported. He had pleaded guilty to possessing cocaine, but was advised the specific subdivision involved possession with intent to sell – which would be considered a drug trafficking aggravated felony. Our review of his plea minutes established he never admitted any intent to sell, and so we were able to vacate his guilty plea. Our client ultimately re-pleaded to simple possession, as a felony, which preserved his eligibility for cancellation of removal.

By the time of his deportation hearing, 10 years had passed since his misconduct, and he never again violated the law. We submitted proof of his successful completion of a drug treatment program shortly after his arrest, as well as the results of six months of recent drug testing which confirmed he had indeed stopped using any drugs. We also documented his severe disability, due to a work related accident, with medical records and post-operative reports. In the end, his extensive family ties, the evidence of his rehabilitation, the severity of his disability, and his continued need for medical treatment in the U.S., tipped the balance and convinced the Judge and government attorney he deserved a grant of cancellation of removal. If his initial plea had not been vacated, however, he certainly would have been deported.

In each case, our client accepted responsibility for his actions; he pleaded guilty and served his sentence. Most importantly, we were able to demonstrate that on balance, our client deserved a second chance. At the Terezakis Law Firm, our experience in criminal-immigration law, and in trying these hardest of cases, ensures our clients have the best possible chance of being granted a second chance to remain in the United States. After all, what is more American than a second chance for someone who deserves it?

DACA RECIPIENTS: DON’T PANIC! Possibilities for Obtaining Legal Status & Avoiding Deportation

Posted on September 6, 2017 by George Terezakis

There is great fear and uncertainty surrounding the Trump administration’s September 5^th, 2017, announcement that it is terminating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) program. Current DACA beneficiaries should understand this does not mean your deferred action status has been terminated at this time. To try to minimize the confusion, we have outlined below the main points contained in the administration’s announcement, and an analysis of how it will impact current beneficiaries. The second section reviews different paths which may be available to enable current DACA beneficiaries to gain legal status in the U.S., including status as Lawful Permanent Residents.

It is important to remember that in most instances, with limited exceptions discussed below, non-citizens present in the U.S. who are out of status and subject to deportation-removal are entitled to a hearing before an Immigration Judge, at which they will have the opportunity to be represented by counsel; to seek release under bond; and to apply for relief from deportation.

I. What does the Trump Administration’s Rescission of DACA Mean for Current Beneficiaries?

The Trump administration’s order does not immediately strip DACA recipients of their deferred action grants, or of their work authorizations, which are currently valid.

USCIS will adjudicate DACA renewal applications and applications for work authorizations which have been accepted by USCIS as of September 5^th, 2017. Individuals granted deferred action, and whose benefits expire on or before March 5^th, 2018, may apply to renew their DACA status and work authorization, provided their applications are accepted by USCIS on or before October 5^th, 2017 – an extremely short deadline which is now less than one month away! These renewal applications must be prepared and submitted well before the deadline, as applications received after that date will be rejected.

DACA recipients whose employment authorizations expire after March 5^th, 2018 will not be permitted to renew their status, and will revert to the unauthorized status they were in prior to being granted DACA.

USCIS will still adjudicate initial DACA applications and requests for work authorization that were accepted by USCIS as of September 5^th, 2017; applications received after that deadline will be rejected.

DACA recipients with advance parole who are currently outside of the U.S. should be admitted to the U.S., provided they return before their advance parole expires. DACA recipients granted advance parole are advised not to travel outside the U.S.: there is always the possibility overly aggressive enforcement will result in the person being denied admission to the U.S. upon their attempt to return. USCIS will no longer approve advance parole requests made based upon status as a DACA recipient.

II. Paths to Legal Status

There is no simple, clear, and easy way to assess whether a current DACA recipient may be eligible to gain legal status or qualify for relief from deportation because these assessments turn on the facts of each person’s particular case. Factors which must be considered in order to determine eligibility for relief from deportation include: how the person initially entered the U.S.; whether the person traveled outside the U.S. after having been out of status, and was subsequently admitted or paroled back into the U.S.; whether the person has a parent, spouse or child who is a Lawful Permanent Resident or U.S. citizen; whether the person fears persecution or torture if deported to their homeland; and the nature of any criminal record the person may have. While a person may only have been eligible for DACA at the time they initially applied for that protection, today that same person may be eligible for different forms of relief or have an alternate pathway to legalization.

Outlined below are paths to legal status which may be available to DACA recipients or to others who are undocumented. While DACA is a valuable program, these other paths to legal status should be considered.

Adjustment of Status. In certain instances, a person who is out of status may be able to adjust their status without leaving the U.S. and become a Lawful Permanent Resident. The person must have previously been admitted or paroled into the U.S. – including after traveling outside the U.S. pursuant to a grant of advance parole while a DACA beneficiary; or be the beneficiary of a petition for an immigrant visa filed prior to April 30^th, 2001. Assuming they otherwise qualify, it may be possible to adjust status based upon a bona fide marriage to a U.S. citizen.
Consular Processing of an immigrant visa, coupled with a provisional waiver of inadmissibility due to unlawful presence in the U.S.. The person must first show they are the beneficiary of an immediately available immigrant visa filed for them by their Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) or U.S. citizen parent or spouse, and then carry their burden of proving their LPR or USC parent or spouse would suffer extreme hardship if they are denied the waiver. If the non-citizen is already in removal proceedings, this relief may still be available, but the process is more complicated.
Cancellation of Removal as a non-permanent resident: once placed into deportation-removal proceedings, the non-citizen may apply for this relief. The person must demonstrate they have resided continuously in the U.S. for a minimum of ten years prior to being placed into removal proceedings; that their parent, spouse or child who is either an LPR or U.S. citizen would suffer exceptional and extremely unusual hardship if the person is deported; that they are a person of good moral character who merits this relief as a matter of discretion; and that they do not have a specified criminal conviction which would disqualify them from eligibility.
Violence Against Women Act: This law enables certain spouses, children and parents of U.S. citizens or spousal and children Lawful Permanent Residents who have been subjected to assault, battery or extreme cruelty by the U.S. citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident family member to petition for legal status in the U.S., and to eventually apply to become Lawful Permanent Residents.
Special Immigrant Juvenile Status: This protection is afforded to unmarried individuals, under the age of 21, after a juvenile or family court has made certain specified findings that the child’s reunification with one of his or her parent(s) is not viable due to prior abuse, neglect or abandonment.
T and U Visas for Victims of Crimes: T visas are available to undocumented individuals who can demonstrate they: have been a victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons; are physically present in the U.S. or its territories on account of trafficking; have assisted in investigating and prosecuting trafficking, if over age 18; and would suffer extreme hardship or harm if removed from the U.S.. U visas are available to non-citizen victims of certain crimes; who have suffered substantial physical or mental abuse or injury as a result; and who have assisted law enforcement with investigating and prosecuting the perpetrators. If granted a T or U visa, the person may then be able to apply to adjust their status and become an LPR.
Special Rule Cancellation of Removal through the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA). In certain instances, children who were under the age of 21 at the time a parent was granted status as a Lawful Permanent Resident through the NACARA, may themselves be eligible to adjust their status and become Lawful Permanent Residents.
Asylum, Withholding and Deferral Under the Convention Against Torture: Asylum, and the related withholding and deferral, are available to individuals who have a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country based upon their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group, or who fear torture, at the hands of government actors, or persons or organizations the government is unable or unwilling to control. A grant of asylum will enable the recipient to apply to adjust their status and become a Lawful Permanent Resident, while a grant of withholding or deferral permits the person to avoid deportation and remain in the safety of the U.S.
“Undocumented” Person May In Fact be a U.S. Citizen by Operation of Law: In certain instances, a child born outside of the U.S. to a U.S. citizen parent or parents, may acquire citizenship at birth. Also, children born in the U.S., or U.S. territories, except those born to diplomats in the U.S., are U.S. citizens.

The above is a very general overview of potential avenues for gaining legal status in the United States, and its purpose is to help current DACA beneficiaries understand that even though their deferred action will soon expire, there is still reason for hope.

Current DACA beneficiaries, and other undocumented individuals, should not fear they will be seized by ICE, put on a plane and deported! All individuals in the U.S., regardless of their legal status, are entitled to constitutionally mandated due process protections. This means that before a person without legal status can actually be deported, the person must first be placed into deportation-removal proceedings before an immigration judge. During their deportation-removal proceedings, the person has the right to be represented by an attorney of their choice, and to apply for relief from deportation. They also have the right to appeal any deportation order to the Board of Immigration Appeals, and may seek further review in the Federal Courts. (Individuals who have already been ordered deported; who unlawfully re-entered the U.S. after having been physically deported; or who overstayed after having been admitted to the U.S. under the visa waiver program, generally, are subject to removal without appearing before an Immigration Judge. In certain limited instances, however, it may still be possible to apply to reopen or rescind an existing deportation-removal order, and then to apply for the relief outlined above.)

DACA beneficiaries should explore all avenues of relief which may be available to them. They must be careful to avoid being victimized by “notarios” or other unscrupulous charlatans who use the current climate of fear to defraud non-citizens. They should resist being pressured to consent to being deported and instead seek the assistance of reputable and experienced immigration attorneys. If a person cannot afford private counsel, they should check with their local bar association, or reputable not-for-profit organizations such as the American Immigration Lawyers Association; the Immigrant Defense Project, located in New York City; the Central American Refugee Center (CARECEN), located in Hempstead, New York; as well as Catholic Charities Immigrant Assistance Program, based in Amityville, New York, for assistance or referral to attorneys who are willing to provide free or low cost representation.

“V” is for Victory! Terezakis Firm Wins for July 2017

Posted on August 3, 2017 by George Terezakis

Withdrawal of Aggravated Felony Charge After 12 Years & 3 Appeals:

To win deportation-removal cases, you must be tenacious; have a legal theory supported by the law, and keep fighting, even if you lose initially. Our client, a long term lawful permanent resident was charged with being removable for having been convicted of an aggravated felony. Unfortunately, the elements of the aggravated felony he was charged with were not defined under the immigration law. During the 12 years we litigated his case, he was ordered deported 3 times, and 3 times we appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals: each time, due to errors by the court, his case was remanded. Finally, in a different case, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision which adopted the same arguments we had raised from the outset. Using that new precedent, we filed a fourth motion to terminate, and after 12 years the government finally conceded we were correct and withdrew the aggravated felony charge. When we shared the news with my client and his wife, he literally cried with joy.

GRANT OF N.A.C.A.R.A. RELIEF UNDER HEIGHTENED STANDARD

As a result of the settlement in the American Baptist Church class action lawsuit, Congress passed the Nicaraguan and Central American Relief Act, which sought to remedy I.N.S.’s history of unfairly denying Central American’s asylum claims. The N.A.C.A.R.A. made it easier for members of this class to gain status as lawful permanent residents, and also allowed members of the class with certain criminal convictions to still become residents, provided they were able to demonstrate a heightened standard of hardship, and to show ten years of good moral character. After a successful appeal; the passage of the ten years necessary to demonstrate his good moral character and rehabilitation; we won his hearing and he was granted status as a lawful permanent resident.

TWO MOTIONS TO RE-OPEN DEPORTATION ORDERS GRANTED

Our client, a long term lawful permanent resident, was rendered deportable as the result of his conviction for possessing a controlled substance. His previous attorney was relieved by the Court, and when he failed to appear in Court for his scheduled hearing, he was ordered deported in absentia, i.e., in his absence. We were retained after he was picked up by I.C.E., and when his physical removal was imminent. We were able to demonstrate, with medical records, that the client’s father had been hospitalized following surgery on the hearing date, and the notice of the removal order was defective. We convinced the Judge to vacate the deportation order, and then we were able to have his proceedings terminated based upon a new decision by the 2nd Circuit regarding the government’s burden of proof in controlled substance cases.

CONVICTION VACATED: RELIEF FROM DEPORTATION NOW AVAILABLE

Posted on June 12, 2017 by George Terezakis

It’s been 7 years since the Supreme Court ruled, in Padilla v. Kentucky, that it is ineffective assistance for defense counsel to fail to warn their client of the adverse immigration consequences of a proposed guilty plea, and yet, such failures continue to take place with shocking frequency. Unfortunately, the first time many learn their seemingly favorable plea bargain subjects them to deportation – removal, is after they are taken into ICE custody and are facing deportation. Often, the only way for them to avoid being deported is to go back to criminal court and try to vacate their conviction.

This past Friday, our CPL 440.10 motion to vacate our client’s misdemeanor conviction was granted, based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We convinced the Judge and District Attorney’s Office that if prior counsel had been aware the plea he negotiated would subject his client to deportation, he could easily have negotiated an alternate, non-deportable plea. We then negotiated a plea to a lesser offense, and our client is now eligible for cancellation of removal as a non-permanent resident.

In far too many cases, a plea blindly entered into, subjects a lawful permanent resident to deportation, or renders an undocumented client ineligible for cancellation of removal. A major part of our practice involves guiding defense counsel and their clients safely through the immigration minefield; other times, as here, our familiarity with criminal-immigration law enables us to vacate a conviction and so help our clients avoid being deported.

Notable Decisions: April 2017

Posted on May 11, 2017 by George Terezakis

Deportation Order Vacated & New Proceedings Ordered After Winning Appeal before the Board of Immigration Appeals

Our client was ordered deported-removed based upon his convictions charged by I.C.E. as involving moral turpitude. Since they were committed within several years of his admission, he was ineligible for cancellation of removal. His prior attorney, although promising to file the paperwork necessary to apply to readjust his status as a lawful permanent resident, failed to do so, and the Immigration Judge ordered his deportation.
We were retained for his appeal, and complied with the requirements of Matter of Lozada, in order to raise a claim of ineffective assistance by our client’s trial counsel. We also argued the Immigration Judge’s decision, sustaining the criminal grounds of deportability-removability, was erroneous because she failed to utilize a recent, controlling, B.I.A. precedent decision for analyzing crimes involving moral turpitude, including Matter of Silva Trevino III. The B.I.A. reversed our client’s deportation order, and sent his case back to the Judge for new proceedings. She must now reconsider her initial, threshold, determination of whether our client’s convictions actually render him deportable. Even if she makes such a finding, we have already filed the paperwork necessary for him to apply to readjust his status, based upon his marriage to a U.S. citizen, in conjunction with a waiver of inadmissibility. Clear, well researched, legal argument, combined with sympathetic facts – our client’s wife and children ended up in a homeless shelter while represented by prior counsel – can and will win the day!

Grant of Cancellation of Removal for Non-Permanent Resident: Documenting “Exceptional and Extremely Unusual Hardship”, Rehabilitation for Criminal Convictions, & Favorable Exercise of Discretion Warranted

Among the most difficult burdens to carry in a deportation-removal proceeding, is showing that a client’s permanent resident, or U.S. citizen, qualifying relative would suffer: “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” if the client is deported. The standard was carefully constructed to limit this relief to a handful of cases nationally every year. Our client’s daughter had suffered from seizures, but it was unclear whether these were only febrile seizures, attributable to her young age, since she had not had any for years. In addition to obtaining hospital records documenting her seizure history, and the records of her speech therapy, we also assisted her parents in obtaining neurological evaluations which revealed speech processing disabilities and previously undiagnosed learning disabilities. Independent psychological examinations and reports reinforced the diagnosis, as did testimony from the child’s teachers. We also showed the devastating impact on the young girl which her father’s deportation would have.

After clearing the hurdle of demonstrating “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship”, we also needed to convince the Judge our client deserved a favorable exercise of discretion. Through testimony we established our client was truly remorseful for his prior criminal convictions; had genuinely rehabilitated himself; gained insight into his prior misconduct; that he had a solid work ethic and that he deserved a favorable exercise of discretion. By winning his case, we not only avoided his deportation, but helped him to gain status as a lawful permanent resident.

Motion to Reopen Denial of Temporary Protected Status Granted

Our client, a Salvadoran national, enjoyed a grant of temporary protected status following the 2001 earthquake in that country. For years he enjoyed the right to remain lawfully in this country, and was granted employment authorizations. Unfortunately, he was eventually denied his T.P.S. renewal, due to his “criminal convictions”. Years later, fearing detention and deportation by I.C.E., he sought our assistance. Our review of his criminal history revealed the U.S.C.I.S. adjudicator had mistakenly read our client’s record, and that our client was in fact eligible for protected status. Our motion to reopen was granted, our client has been reissued his employment authorization card, and no longer fears being deported.

Federal Court Hearing Granted: Motion to Vacate Aggravated Felony Conviction

Our client, a lawful permanent resident, was found removable for having been convicted of an “alien smuggling” aggravated felony. He maintained his prior criminal defense attorney had told him his guilty plea would not trigger his deportation. We obtained our client’s release from custody following a Lora bond hearing, and have worked with an experienced federal criminal defense attorney in bringing a motion to vacate the conviction: we provided criminal-immigration expertise by writing sections of the motion dealing with the aggravated felony, and ineffective assistance of counsel, arguments. Our client was granted a hearing on his motion to vacate his conviction, when such motions are simply, routinely, denied. The hearing was commenced, testimony taken, and we are still litigating this matter.

Three, I.N.A. §601(a), Provisional Waivers of Inadmissibility Granted

A non-citizen who enters the U.S. without inspection, or who overstays a lawful admission after his visa has expired, and who remains in the U.S. for a year or longer in that undocumented status, is rendered inadmissible to the U.S. for a ten (10) year period. Even if the person has a family member who can petition for him to gain status as a lawful permanent resident, historically, he or she must first leave the U.S., and then if they are eligible, apply for an I.N.A. §601 waiver of their inadmissibility, as part of the consular processing of their petition for an immigrant visa, or “green card”. This process divides families by requiring the non-citizen to apply from outside the U.S. – a process that often takes years.

President Obama acted to ease this suffering by enabling certain non-citizens to apply for an I.N.A. § 601(a) provisional waiver of inadmissibility from within the United States. The person must demonstrate the denial of a provisional waiver will cause their lawful permanent resident, or U.S. citizen, parent or spouse, to suffer extreme hardship, which is a difficult standard to meet.

This past month, two of our clients, for whom we previously obtained § 601(a) provisional waivers, just received their green cards after successfully completing their Consular interview in their native country; and a third client just had his provisional waiver approved. We are consistently successful with these cases because we carefully document the financial, psychological, and emotional hardship our clients’ family members will suffer if denied a waiver. We carefully collect, index and submit: medical records and reports; psychological evaluations; financial and tax records; employment records; and our clients’ children’s educational and special educational records. These records are in turn supported by the carefully prepared affidavits of our clients, their family and friends. We ensure the applications we submit are easy to read, well organized, and present the hardship in a compelling manner. While time consuming, we believe it is important to build a stronger bridge to ensure our clients get across safely.

Luckiest Man Alive…Cancellation Granted for Firearm Conviction

Posted on January 13, 2017 by George Terezakis

When he was 8, he was in a horrific auto-crash: his father died, he survived.

When he was 9, he immigrated to the U.S..

At 25, he was broadsided by a car while riding his motorcycle. His femur was exposed, he had multiple fractures, and they had him on a slab in the hospital’s basement morgue: dead. His mom arrived at the hospital shortly after the call to view her son’s body; as she screamed in grief, our client’s brother noticed his finger twitching…a coma! He went on to a full recovery!

Yesterday, at the conclusion of his deportation hearing, an Immigration Judge granted our client cancellation of removal, as a lawful permanent resident, for his conviction for possessing a firearm – also from his early 20’s. Now a grown man in his 40’s, the Judge recognized our client’s rehabilitation, including: his owner-ship of two thriving businesses; real estate holdings; his history of paying taxes; exceptionally close family ties; community service and his support for his mother throughout his life. Here’s to second chances and to keeping families together!

Christmas comes Early!

Posted on December 17, 2016 by George Terezakis

Monday, after trial, we won a cancellation of removal hearing for our client, a long term permanent resident. Despite his 15 years as a union painter – his drug addiction drew him into a major drug conspiracy, resulting in a felony conviction for possession of a controlled substance. Now he has a second chance at life.

Thursday, after 32 years of fearing deportation as an undocumented immigrant, our client adjusted her status and became lawful permanent resident. She started crying after the interviewer approved her application, then her son started crying, and when we went outside and told her elderly parents, they started crying. Tears of joy. Continue reading →

Aggravated Felony Win!

Posted on August 6, 2015 by George Terezakis

After being placed in deportation-removal proceedings due to her felony fraud conviction involving a $10,000.00 loss to the government, we were able to overcome the aggravated felony bar to cancellation of removal and win our lawful permanent resident a grant of cancellation of removal.
Our client, a single mother, pleaded guilty to felony larceny for under-reporting her income when renewing her public housing contract. She was ordered to pay $10,000.00 in restitution, and although a lawful permanent resident, she was placed into deportation-removal proceedings for having been convicted of a fraud aggravated felony. Several immigration attorneys advised her she had in fact been convicted of an aggravated felony, and would almost certainly be deported despite having lived in this country in excess of 20 years and despite having minor U.S. citizen children; they turned her away. Her two prior convictions for D.W.I. were more salt in the wound. She was referred to our firm.
A Dollar’s Difference Spares Deportation!
Continue reading →

Hablamos Español Abogados Bilingues

Tag Archives: cancellation of removal