there are different components to this rightful full and fair hearing and one of which is the right to counsel another which is the right to a neutral fact finder and another one which is the right to effective assistance of counsel it is our position that this case presents a have not responded to any just letters and this was the very first things that the immigration judge noted what's troubling about this is the fact that at no point is there any evidence that first of all that attorney take even had this conversation aside from just the simple fact that the immigration judge summarized nor is it indicated whether or not the immigration judge had instructed attorney picked to be present i mean it's crucial here is that at the time that the conversation was had in the morning attorneys had legally was still little bit to see if i can probe the find out exactly what the objection is sr i'm supposed come one o'clock in the afternoon mr packer appears and says he's not ready to proceed because of all the things that were put on the record by the immigration judge judy reportedly said in the morning that is that i tried to contact i fired you is non responsive no sign of a letter i made phone calls so i just don't know anything i didn't turn in the papers are supposed to turn in two weeks ago because my client hasn't responded to  your honor i i'm not prepared today i need to withdraw whatever with the immigration judge of have abused his discretion or violated a right to counsel or done anything else that would have just defied granting the petition if he had had counsel mr parker's represented him for five years but if the client doesn't cooperate with counsel what is the immigration judge supposed to do america that's a that's an excellent point around and our response to be essentially that i these allegations and then somehow miss him and those are expected to make a knowing and voluntary waiver of his right to counsel under the terms our position would be that the standard for a waiver of counsel is that it must be known and then must be voluntary entitled to make the same decision decides what the lawyer saying is is what happened and so turns to your client and says ok now why is he obligated to give further extensions because at that point your client and used to find notable attorney but she could have taken steps to then request a continuance on the basis that he had only been recently contracted under leases that here's the problem and just what i've been really getting to kind of petition or indefinitely delay things simply by not cooperated with counsel showing up two years later here's my brand new lawyer we've got to give that person some time to get ready next available spot in the calendar is another two years away i mean you could knock out pretty good couldn't  communication with his counsel and when the time came to have this hearing that been scheduled a long time before before which the immigration judge had made clear before he needed to submit updated material background checks so on and so forth none of which had been the immigration judge compelled because the petitioner says it wasn't me it was him compelled to accept petitioners version of it and give another two year extension well in this case the looks and that's the reason why the immigration judge should have been compelled that right in this case it's clear that mr mendoza never knowing or voluntarily with that right to counsel it's clear that mr mendoza at all times and wanted attorney present which is evident by him not only have contacted attorney thanks for five years but also because i would know that the immigration judge in florence arizona noted that he would be a good candidate for cancellation and essentially it was denied to lack of prosecution because attorney pack failed to abide by his duties which was to ensure that the application and that he was prejudiced by that infuriated at the fact that attorney pac and petitioner were not prepared to go forward scolded them both and then my petition is request for a continuance now we're going to record he hired a lawyer to represent him he appeared at the court and every court hearing every time he was told to so what happened in this case why did you scapegoat the war on what went wrong record he didn't move to continue the case had he been unable to reach a client he should've did what any competent lawyer would have done which is to contact the court and try to protect his client's in  any adjudicator has to be able to control the case load a motion to continue is something that's within a wide discretion of any court the history here is a case that has been continued multiple times and will wind up visiting with the government some of the reasons it was continued but it's inescapable the case has been around for like five years and the calendar  this particular court was apparently unbelievably congested because you've got a date your dates two years into the future let's pack shows up that afternoon or even he filed a motion to continue a couple weeks before it's hard to figure out what the immigration judge is going to do with that motion to continue i mean short of of somebody suffering a heart attack in the courthouse steps this case was not likely a good candidate for continuance under any circumstances so recognizing that an adjudicator has to have authority to control his or her docket y c at the immigration judge in this circumstance decides the reason isn't good enough because his responsibility to take and supervise the lawyer here i am two years later we have made more progress in this case i can't write another continuance which has to be for another two years just because they're not ready to go forward this case has to move forward today next hearing it was not for them for him to secure counsel and i covered so many hearings i was continued immigration judges continue because mendoza was unprepared for the record of eighty two you will notice that that is absolutely not what the immigration he had the right to rely on counsel you know if if if i failed to bring if i failed to bring my binders with me to the court my client would be very upset and we don't blame the client for that we don't case well i passed there because few questions could have been more pointless given that mr mendoza showed up with a lawyer and there's no question that he wanted to have a lawyer the problem was that the lawyer for reasons that are understandable needed it continues to be able to do something about the case because it is then hired the day before so i'm not sure i fault the immigrate there are things for which the immigration judge can be faulted i'm not sure failing to ask that question is their most serious problem and i'm also not sure how one substantial difference between this case and hernandez feel and that's the history if the eye j's decision to leave something  what he could to get prepared but his client was unresponsive then i'm not sure it's a violation either of this deal or an abuse of discretion for the immigration judge to say you have yours you didn't do what i told you in court two years ago to do i'm not going to give you another extension rather continuance just because you now it's on the i'd like to hire a new lawyer or kind of pass the right to counsel stage if in fact listening to these hearings through an interpreter and the immigration judge is speaking as you and i are speaking here today in the transcript there are all regressed after paragraph after paragraph  show what shows like and knowing waiver of the statutory right counsel here first of all answer the first part of your question first and then the second part  counsel a continuance so whether it's right or wrong under amanda's gil you have a duty if fairly was in the building or in the area its back doors is a guy named mcguire i think i'm absolutely right on that yeah and who is mcguire when we checked on him you know terrorism of wire it was the same thing right the same  that are just barton lawyers better than the lawyer so we're creating this situation which yeah i think you know we know what the justice department knows that these notorious are up there just sucked in the blood out of people and getting the money out of them they don't go to work for nothing you know these people work they have to struggle like they say their money then they put in the they pay these people when they get their relatives to come up with money the way our country time in the continuance are attributed to him when in fact with regard to october town i couldn't tell whether it was niger had a priority matter and the lawyer look like you want to wait around so discretion thing is that the person had nothing to do with any of the continuance was mr mendoza and yet what the b i pointed to was look at all these continuances and then you get to the day that ultimately matters and i haven't years of experience the judge gregersen has but i have to say this this form of the attorney coming in in the morning and talking to the i j a in a way that remarkably bad mouthed his own client and then not being seen again seems to me to be an unusual way to make a record for why mr mendoza needs to hire new counsel and it has you experienced a case where in the morning the attorney goes in and bad mouth the client and the afternoon clients left out to dry and i haven't  look for an attorney and how much time a judge is supposed to give that feeling to find attorney compared to a different situation where the elite has already engaged in attorney has already contracted in turn the training has already made numerous appearances and the happened during that course other than they weren't able to find them however i would respectfully direct the course attention to the declaration that was the middle to the board where mr mendoza makes clear what happened what happened this he went outside during the break he encountered mr pay and he explains what was going on mr pecksniff to him were go back and lie go back and say that it was your fault otherwise i will not go back in there with you mr mendoza refused to do that which was wh as true unless they're inherently unreliable or unless some type of clear and negative credibility terminations made both of those what both of those are absent from this situation so soon after your question your honor our position with the that mr packer was there he was outside he encountered mr mendoza and then after mr mendoza was unwilling to extend the ineffectiveness that he had already demonstrated he left and again he left mr mendoza without any type of protection and clearly that's in effect immigration judge instructed mr peck on countless occasions in the record at page seventy three also counsel make sure you do with a divine a criminal record check their record at eighty three