T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on a nd i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

Er i c H o l d e r , J r . i s s u b s t i tu t e d f o rh i s p r e d e c e s s o r , M i c h a e l B. ** M u k a s e y , a s A tt o rn e y G e n e r a l o f th e U n i t e d St a t e s , p u r s u a n tt o Fe d . R. A p p . P. 43 (c )( 2). T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y f i nds thi s c a s e s ui t abl e f

orde c i s i on w i thout ** * o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2).

*** * T he H onor abl e R obe r tJ . T i m l i n, U ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge f orthe C e ntr a l D i s tr i c tof

C a l i f orni a , s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT E V A R IS T O B E C E R R IL and S IL V IA BE CE RR I L, P et i t i o n ers, v. E R IC H . H O L D E R , JR . , A tt orney ** G e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 07- 71290 A ge nc y N o. A 077- 823- 252/ 253 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d A ugus t31, 2009 *** P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B ef ore: A L E X K O Z IN S K I , C hi ef Judg e, S T E P H E N R E IN H A R D T , C i rc ui tJudg e, and R O B E R T J. T IM L IN , S eni or D i stri ctJudg e. **** 

# FI LED JAN 21 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

R e ga r di ng M r . B e c e rr i l , the e vi de nc e “ i ndi c a t e [ d] tha tone orm or e of the g ro u n d s fo r m an d at o ry d en i al o f th e ap p l i cat i o n fo r rel i ef m ay ap p l y, ” n am el y a c o n v ic tio n o f

ac r im e o f

m o r a l tu rp itu d e , th e r e b y s h if tin g th e b u r d e n to B e c e rr il to show thatsuch a groun d d oes notappl y. 8 C . F . R . § 1 24 0. 8(d); R endo n v. Mukasey , 520 F . 3d 967, 973 ( 9th C i r . 2008) . B e c e rr i l ’ s a tt orne y s t a t e d on the r e c o r d th a t h e w a s c o n v ic te d o f av io la tio n o f

C a lif o rn iaP e n a l C o d e § 2 4 5 ( a ) . A n d th e a tto rn e y o f

f e r e d in to e v id e n c e ad o c u m e n t f r o m th e M e r c e d C o u n ty M u n i ci p al C o u rtw h i ch st at ed th atcri m i n al reco rd s w ere av ai l ab l e fo r 2 ch arg es: C a l i f orni aP e na l C ode § 245( a ) ( 1) a nd C a l i f orni aV e hi c l e C ode §§ 23152( a ) a nd (b). T he att orney’ s a dm i ss i on coup l ed w i th the M er ce d C ou nty M un i ci pal C ou rt d o c u m e n t s h o w th a t o n e g r o u n d f o rm a n d a to ry d e n ia l m ay ap p ly a n d th a t is s u f f ic ie n t to s h if

t th e b u r d e n o f

p r o o f to B e c e rr il. See 8 C . F . R . § 1 24 0. 8(d). O nce the bu rden shi ft ed, B ec erri l w as re qu i re d t o p rove by a prepond er ance o f th e e v id e n c e th a t h e w a s n o t c o n v ic te d o f a s s au lt w ith ad e a d ly w e ap o n . H o w e v e r , o n ly o n e p ie c e o f e v id e n c e , th e F B I r e p o r t, te n d e d to s h o w th a t B e c e rr il w a s notc onvi c t e d of

a s s aul tw i th ade a dl y w e apon. A l though i tt e nde d t o pr ove th a t h e w a s c o n v ic te do f b a tte ry , r a th e rth a n a s s au lt w ith ad e a d ly w e ap o n , it d id notde f i ni t i ve l ys t a t e tha t . F ur the rm or e , B e c e rr i l of f e r e d c ontr a di c t ory t e s t i m ony3

re gardi ng the nature of hi s c on vi ct i on , atfi rs tst at i ng thathe di d n otbel i eve he w as c o n v ic te d o f

a n y th in g a n d th e n s a y in g h e p le d g u ilty to d r iv in g u n d e rth e in f lu e n c e . A nd the F B I r e por tdoe s nots a y tha tB e c e rr i l w a s c ha r ge d orc onvi c t e d of drunk d r iv in g , p r o v id in g y e t a n o th e rr e a s o n to d o u b t its th o r o u g h n e s s . F in a lly , th e o n ly u n e q u iv o c a l s ta te m e n ts m a d e a t B e c e rr il’s h e a r in g c o n c e rn in g w h a t c r im e B e c e rr il w a s c o n v ic te d o f

w e r e m a d e b y B e c e rr il’s a tto rn e y : F ir s t, h e s ta te d th a t B e c e rr il w a s “ c onvi c t e d of

245A of the pe na l c ode ” a nd the n he i de nt i f i e d the c r i m e of conv i ct i on as “ as saul t . ” O rdi nari l y, adm i ss i on s of f ac tby coun se l i n rem ov al p r o c e e d in g s a r e b in d in g o n th e c lie n t. Se e Ro dr i g u ez - G o n z a lezv . I

NS , 640 F . 2d 1 1 3 9 , 1 1 4 0 - 4 1 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 1 ) . T h e r e f o r e , th e B I A ’s c o n c lu s io n th a t M r . B e c e rr il fa i l ed t o sat i sf

y hi s burden o f provi ng he w as no tconv i ct ed of a cr i m e of m oral turpi tud e i s s up po rt ed by subst ant i al evi dence. S ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e a l s o s uppor t s the B I A ’ s f i ndi ng tha tM s . B e c e rr i l m a de m i s r e pr e s e nt a t i ons t o the I J w hi l e unde roa th a ta n i m m i gr a t i on he a r i ng w hi l e s he w a s s e e k in g th e b e n e f

it o f c a n c e lla tio n o f

r e m o v a l. See 8 U . S . C . §§ 1 2 2 9 b ( b ) ( 1 ) ( B ) , 1 1 0 1 ( f

) ( 6 ) ; se e al

so Kun gys v . U

ni ted Stat es , 485 U . S . 759, 780 (198 8). D uri ng the heari ng , M s. B ec erri l fi rs tt es t i fi ed thatshe had never been a rr e s t e d, buton c r os s - e xa m i na t i on a dm i tt e d tha ts he ha d i n f a c tbe e n a rr e s t e d f

or the f ta nd c ontr i but i ng t o the de l i nque nc y of am i nor . S he s a i d tha ts he ha d not4

o r ig in a lly m e n tio n e d th e a rr e s ts b e c au s e s h e d id n o t k n o w if th e y te c h n ic a lly qu al i fi ed as arre st s, even tho ug h she w as det ai ned for fi ve ho urs, appeare d b ef ore a j udge , a nd pa i d af

i ne . A f a i rr e a di ng of

M s . B e c e rr i l ’ s t e s t i m ony i s tha ts he or i gi na l l y a tt e m pt e d t o hi de he rc r i m i na l r e c or d, butupon c r os s - e xa m i na t i on, s he real i zed th atsh e w as n o tg o i n g t o b e ab l e t o , t o l d th e tru th as t o h er arrest hist o ry, and con coct ed an i m pl ausi bl e s t ory a s t o w hy she had no tori gi nal l y m ent i on ed her a rr e s t . T o obt a i n r e ve r s a l unde rthe s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e s t a nda r d, the appl i c a ntf or ca ncel l at i on of re m ov al m ustdem on stra t e thatthe evi dence noton l y s up po rt s that c o n c lu s io n , b u t c o m p e ls it. G ut i errez v . Mukasey , 52 1 F . 3d 11 14 , 11 16 (9th C i r. 2008) . M s . B e c e rr i l f

a i l e d t o de m ons tr a t e tha tthe e vi de nc e c om pe l l e d the c onc l us i on tha ts he ha d notgi ve n f a l s e t e s t i m ony f

orthe purpos e of

obt a i ni ng im m ig r a tio n b e n e f

its . P E T I T I ON S F OR R E VI E W DE NI E D.5

07 -712 90 B ec erri l v. H ol der

R E I N H A R D T , C ir c u it J u d g e , c o n c u rr in g in p a r t a n d d is s e n tin g in p a r t: T h e ev i d en ce i n M r. B ecerril ’ s case, v i ew ed i n i t s en t i rety, d o es not

“ i ndi c a t e tha tone orm or e of the gr ounds f

orm a nda t ory de ni a l of

the appl i c a t i on m ay ap p l y” 8 C . F . R . § 1 2 4 0 . 8 (d ). T h e reco rd i s n o t am bi gu ou s. M r. B ec erri l w as c onvi c t e d of

ba tt e ry , w hi c h i s , a l l a gr e e , notac r i m e of m or a l turpi tude . T he M e r c e d C o u n ty M u n ic ip a l C o u r t c r im in a l r e c o r d a n d th e F B I r e p o r t s h o w p r e c is e ly w hatoccurre d i n January19 95 w hen M r. B ec erri l w as conv i ct ed. T he M er ce d C o u n ty M u n i ci p al C o u rtreco rd sh o w s th atM r. B ecerril w as c har ge d w ith a s s au lt w i th ade a dl y w e apon unde rC a l i f orni aP e na l C ode § 245( a ) ( 1) a nd w i th dr i vi ng w h i l e i n t o x i c a t e d u n d e rCa l i f o rn i aV e h i c l e Co d e § § 2 3 1 . 5 2 ( a ) a n d ( b ) . Th e s a me r e c or d s how s tha tthe di s pos i t i on of the c ha r ge s w a s 36 m onths of pr oba t i on, 20 da y s i n j a i l , e nr ol l m e nti n a n a l c ohol tr e a tm e ntpr ogr a m , a nd af i ne . T he doc um e nt do es no tre fl ec tw hatthe ac tof c onv i c t i on w as , al tho ug h the nature of the se nt ence i n com bi nat i on w i th the w ords the w ords “ pl ea d[s] no cont es t ” s ug gest s thatM r. B ec erri l pl ed t o a l es se r off ense , ra ther than g oi ng t o tri al on the cr i m es w i th w hi ch h e w a s in itia lly c h a r g e d . 

# FI LED JAN 21 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS6

T he F B I r e c or d the n m a ke s c l e a rthe of f e ns e t o w hi c h M r . B e c e rr i l pl e d n o lo co n ten dere – th e o ffen se o f w h i ch h e w as actu al l y convi cted . T hatre cord st at es that M r. B ec erri l w as “ arre st ed or re ce i ved” on the c har ge o f a s s au lt w ith ad e a d ly w eap o n . Itth en sh o w s th ath e w as convi cted i n M er ce d C ou nty M un i ci pal C ou rt of the l e s s e rof

f e ns e of ba tt e ry , f

orw hi c h he r e c e i ve d 20 da y s i n j a i l , 36 m onths of p r o b a tio n , a n d af

in e . T h e r e c a n b e n o d o u b t, b a s e d u p o n th is r e c o r d , th a t th e o n ly offe nse of w hi ch M r. B ec erri l w as conv i ct ed w as batt ery, and thatthe se nt ence r e f e rr e d to in th e C o u n ty M u n ic ip a l C o u r t r e c o r d w a s th e s e n te n c e f o rth a t o f f e n s e . I n s h o r t, th e s e tw o r e c o r d s , ta k e n to g e th e r , s h o w b e y o n d a n y q u e s tio n , n o t s im p ly by a pre po nd er ance of the evi dence, thati n January19 95 M r. B ec erri l w as arre st ed and charged w i th the great eroffe nse of a ss aul tw i th a deadl y w eapo n, as w el l as drunk dr i vi ng, a nd w a s the n convi cted , fol l ow i ng a pl eaof n o lo co n ten dere , s o le ly o f th e le s s e ro f

f e n s e o f b a tte ry . T he m aj ori ty hol ds thatthe F B I r eport , w hi ch show s thatthe conv i ct i on w as for batt ery, const i tut es i nsuffi ci entevi dence of the nature of thatconv i ct i on . I a m n o t a w a r e o f

as in g le im m ig r a tio n c a s e in w h ic h a n F B I r e c o r d h a s b e e n h e ld i n s u f f i c i e n tt o e s t ab l i s h th a ta n i n d i v i d u a l h a s b e e n c o n v i c t e d o f th e o f f e n s e s h o wn on thatre cord. N or am I a w ar e of a ny ca se of any ki nd i n w hi ch an un chal l enged a n d u n c o n tr o v e r te d F B I r e c o r d h a s b e e n d e e m e d in a d e q u a te f o rs u c h p u rp o s e .7

H e r e , the F B I r e c or d c a rr i e s pa r t i c ul a rw e i ghtbe c aus e i ti s f ul l y c ons i s t e ntw i th the st at e c ou rtre cord thatw as al so i ntrodu ce d i nt o evi dence, and b ec ause no -one w as confront ed w i th o r c on t es t ed the ac cura cyof the F B I r ec ord– nei ther the pet i t i on er n o rth e g o v e rn m e n t. T h e m a jo r ity c h a r a c te r iz e s th e F B I r e p o r t a s m e r e ly “te n d [ in g ] to p r o v e th a t [ B e c e rr il] w a s c o n v ic te d o f b a tte ry , r a th e rth a n a s s au lt w ith a dea dl y w eapo n, ” c l ai m i ng that“ i tdi d n otdefi ni t el y s t at e that . ” Y et , as the B oard of I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s ( “ B I A ” ) not e d i n i t s opi ni on, e ve n the gove rnm e nt ac kn ow l edges thatthe F B I r eportconst i tut es “ defi ni t i ve obj ec t i ve do cum ent ary cr i m i nal evi dence. ” F urtherm ore, as the B IA al so ob se rved, thi s i s the “ on l y” such evi dence “ i n the re cord” and i ti s e vi dence that“ i nd i ca t es that[M r. B ec erri l ] w as c onvi c t e d of

vi ol a t i ng C a l i f

orni aP e na l C ode § 242 ( ba tt e ry ) . ” N o doc um e nt a ry or othe re vi de nc e s ugge s t s tha tthe F B I r e c or d i s i nc orr e c t . N ordi d a ny w i tne s s de ny i t s a c c ur a c y ore ve n s ugge s ttha ti tm i ghtbe i nc orr e c t

— a nd i ts t a t e d c l e a r l y , not a m bi guous l y , tha tM r . B e c e rr i l w a s c onvi c t e d of ba tt e ry f ol l ow i ng the f

i l i ng of the as saul tw i th a deadl y w eapo n charge. M r. B ec erri l ’ s s t at em ent s t o the Im m i grat i on Judg e ( “ IJ ”) , i n the ea rl y s t ages of the heari ng , abou tthe ci rc um st ance s of hi s a rr es t , char ge, and con vi ct i on m ay have been confused and un ce rt ai n, bu tthey do n oti n any w aysugg es tthathe w as c onvi c t e d of

the gr e a t e rof

f e ns e w i th w hi c h he w a s i ni t i a l l y c ha r ge d. I f a ny thi ng,8

h is s ta te m e n ts s u g g e s t, e rr o n e o u s ly , th a t h e w a s c o n v ic te d o n ly o f d ru n kd r iv in g . I n a ny e ve nt , M r . B e c e rr i l ’ s e a r l y c onf us i on c e r t a i nl y doe s notoutw e i gh the s ubs e que nt l y i ntr oduc e d c onc r e t e doc um e nt a ry e vi de nc e of the F B I r e por ta nd the M e r c e d C ounty M uni c i pa l C our tr e c or d, orunde rm i ne the c onc l us i on tha tthe r e c o r d c le a r ly r e q u ir e s , b a s e d o n th e u n c o n tr o v e r te d d o c u m e n ta ry e v id e n c e . S i gni f i c a nt l y , onc e tha te vi de nc e w a s i ntr oduc e d, ne i the rs i de c ha l l e nge d i tor contra di ct ed i ti n any w ay . N or do the ea rl y s t at em ent s by M r. B ec erri l ’ s c ou nsel th a t h is c lie n t w a s c o n v ic te d o f a s s au lt w ith ad e a d ly w e ap o n c h a n g e th e s e f a c ts in a ny w a y . A dm i s s i ons m a de by c ouns e l dur i ng ar e m ova l pr oc e e di ng a r e not b in d in g o n a c li en t i f th e c li en t su b se q u en tl y p ro ff er s e v id en ce th at co u n se l’ s st at em ent s “ w er e untrue or i ncorrec t . ” M at terof V elasqu ez , 19 I . & N . D e c . 377, 38 3 (19 86 ). H er e the evi dence s ho w i ng thatcoun se l ’ s s t at em entw as i ncorrec tw as s ubs e que nt l y s ubm i tt e d by the gove rnm e nt , notthe c l i e nt . S o m uc h the be tt e rf or M r. B ecerril , as th e g o v ern m en t ’ s ev i d en ce i s “ d efi n i t i v e, o b j ect i v e d o cu m en t ary .

. . evi dence” thatcoul d n oti n g oo d fai th b e c hal l enged b y the go vernm entand w as n o t in f a c t c o n te s te d , c h a lle n g e d , o rc o n tr a d ic te d b y M r . B e c e rr il. M r . B e c e rr i l ’ s c ouns e l i ni t i a l l y a s ke d hi m t o t e s t i f y a tthe i m m i gr a t i on h e a r in g ab o u t h is a rr e s t a n d c o n v ic tio n in 1 9 9 5 . C o u n s e l, h o w e v e r , ap p a r e n tly re garded M r. B ec erri l ’ s a nsw er s a s t oo i nd ef i ni t e, and cutshorthi s t es t i m on y w hen9

i tbe c a m e c l e a rtha thi s unde r s t a ndi ng of the na tur e of

the a gr e e d- upon di s pos i t i on w as i ncorrec t ; i nst ea d, coun se l m ade acl ea rl y e rr on eous st at em entabou tM r. B e c e rr i l ’ s c onvi c t i on, ba s e d on hi s ow n l a c k of a uthor i t a t i ve i nf

orm a t i on. A tthe t i m e c ouns e l m a de hi s s t a t e m e nt , he ha d nots e e n the F B I r e c or ds , a nd he di d not i ntrodu ce any docum ent ary e vi dence thatshow ed the nature of the conv i ct i on . It ap p e a r s c o u n s e l h a d s e e n o n ly th e c o u r t r e c o r d th a t s h o w e d th e o f f e n s e s w ith w hi ch M r. B ec ce ri l w as ori gi nal l y c harged, bu thad n otse en any r ec ord that s h o w e d ac o n v ic tio n . W h e n c o u n s e l s u b s e q u e n tly a tte m p te d to s u p p o r t h is s ta te m e n t r e g a r d in g th e c o n v ic tio n b y p r o v id in g th e I J w ith th e M e r c e d C o u n ty M u n ic ip a l C o u r t r e c o r d , th e g o v e rn m e n t im m e d ia te ly n o te d th a t: “it’s n o t r e a lly cl ea r . . . base d o n thi s docum entw hether or notthe re spon dentw as i n fac t c o n v ic te d o f

[ a s s au lt w ith ad e a d ly w e ap o n ]. T h e c h a r g e s d o n ’t n e c e s s a r ily corr es po nd t o the fi ne and the di sposi t i on . ” T he go vernm entsubsequent l y off er ed th e F B I r ec o rd , w h ich co n stitu ted d o cu m en tary ev id en ce th at M r. B ec er ril’ s c ouns e l ’ s s t a t e m e ntw a s untrue a nd i nc orr e c t . A s the B I A s t a t e s i n i t s opi ni on, “ the go vernm entspec i fi ca l l y not e[ d] thatthe on l y def i ni t i ve obj ec t i ve do cum ent ary c r i m i na l e vi de nc e i n the r e c or d i ndi c a t e s tha t[ M r . B e c e rr i l ] w a s c onvi c t e d of v io lati n g C alifo rn ia P en al C o d e § 2 4 2 (b attery ).” D en yin g an in d iv idu al’s appl i c a t i on f

orc a nc e l l a t i on of

r e m ova l on the ba s i s of al a w y e r ’ s e rr one ous10

st at em ent , w hen d ocum ent ary e vi dence, l etal on e a n u nchal l enged F B I r ec ord subsequent l y e nt er ed i n the re cord, cl ea rl y di sproves the l aw ye r’ s a ss ert i on , i s c l ea r e rr orunde ra ny m e a ni ng of the t e rm . H e r e , de s pi t e the unc ont e s t e d e vi de nc e i n the re co rd , i n th e f

o rm o f th e F B I I d en ti fica ti o n R ec o rd , an d th e g o v er n m en t’ s ac kn ow l edgm entthatthe “ on l y def i ni t i ve obj ec t i ve do cum ent ary c ri m i nal e vi de nc e ” w a s tha tr e c or d, w hi c h s how s tha tM r . B e c e rr i l w a s c onvi c t e d of the less ero ff en se o f b attery , th e B IA b as ed it s d ec isio n o n M r. B ec er ril’ s c o u n se l’ s un supp ort ed, fa ctual l y i nacc urat e s t at em entthatthe conv i ct i on w as for the great er of f e ns e of a s s aul tw i th ade a dl y w e apon. T hi s c as e i s f

arfr om cl ose. W e have cl ea r, un di sput ed do cum ent ary e v id e n c e in th e r e c o r d th a t in 1 9 9 5 M r . B e c e rr il w a s c o n v ic te d o f b a tte ry , w h ic h is notac r i m e of

m or a l turpi tude . M r . B e c e rr i l ’ s c ouns e l m a de a n untrue a nd i ncorrec tst at em entabou thi s c l i ent , thatw as cl ea rl y a n err on eous as sum pt i on , that l e d the B I A t o hol d e rr one ous l y tha tM r . B e c e rr i l w a s i ne l i gi bl e f orc a nc e l l a t i on of rem o v al . A l th o u g h an ap p l i can tfo r su ch rel i ef h as th e b u rd en o f p ro v i n g b y a prepon dera nce of the evi dence thathe has notbeen conv i ct ed of a cr i m e of m oral turpi tud e, thatbu rden i s s at i sf i ed w hen the re cord before the court , es t abl i shes that h e w as not

c onvi c t e d of

s uc h ac r i m e , butr a the rof al e s s e rof

f e ns e — w he the rthe d et erm i n at i v e ev i d en ce i s i n tro d u ced b y th e p et i t i o n er o r b y th e g o v ern m en t . T h u s,11

the m a j or i ty ’ s c onc l us i on tha tM r . B e c e rr i l “ f a i l e d t o s a t i s f

y hi s bur de n of

pr ovi ng he w a s notc onvi c t e d of ac r i m e of

m or a l turpi tude ” i s c l e a r l y e rr one ous . T he reco rd i n co n tro v ert i b l y sh o w s th e co n trary. S u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e in th e r e c o r d d o e s n o t s u p p o r t th e B I A ’s d e c is io n w ith r e s p e c t to M r . B e c e rr il. M r . B e c e rr il w a s n o t c o n v ic te d o f a s s au lt w ith ad e a d ly w eapo n; ra ther, as the un cont es t ed F B I I dent i fi ca t i on R ec ord est abl i shes , by m ore th a n ap r e p o n d e r a n c e o f th e e v id e n c e , h e w a s c o n v ic te d o f b a tte ry . A r e a s o n ab le a dj udi c a t orw oul d the r e f or e be c om pe l l e d t o c onc l ude tha tthe B I A e rr e d i n f i ndi ng M r . B e c e rr il s ta tu to r ily in e lig ib le f o rc a n c e lla tio n o f

r e m o v a l. See G ut i errez v . Mukasey , 5 2 1 F .3 d 1 1 1 4 , 1 1 1 6 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 8 ) . M r . B e c e rr i l ha s s uf

f e r e d f r om tw o e gr e gi ous e rr or s i n thi s c a s e . F i r s t , the B IA (a nd no w the m aj ori ty) fa i l t o cre di ta l egi t i m at e F B I r ec ord thati s di sposi t i ve, u n c o n tr a d ic te d , a n d n o t th e s u b je c t o f a n y c la im o f

in a c c u r a c y o rim p r o p r ie ty . S e c o n d , M r . B e c e rr il h a s b e e n p e n a liz e d b e c au s e o f th e in e f f e c tiv e a s s is ta n c e o f

h is c ouns e l , w ho f

a i l e d t o m a ke a ny e f

f or tt o obt a i n the ne c e s s a ry r e c or ds a nd w ho m a d e a n u n tru e , in c u lp a to ry r e p r e s e n ta tio n ab o u t M r . B e c e rr il’s c r im in a l r e c o r d . P e rh ap s th is w ill n o t b e th e e n d o f th e s a g a , a s M r . B e c e rr il is n o w c e r ta in ly e n title d , to p r e s e n t ac la im o f in e f f e c tiv e a s s is ta n c e o f

c o u n s e l to th e B I A . I t is unf or tuna t e tha tthe m a

j or i ty ’ s e rr one ous vi e w of the l a w m a y e xt e nd the c urr e ntO urde c i s i on a l s o m a ke s i tc l e a rf orthe f i r s tt i m e tha tc ouns e l ’ s i ne f f e c t i ve 1 p e r f o rm a n c e w a s p r e

ju d ic ia l. U n til n o w , o n e w o u ld h a v e th o u g h t th a t th e f u ll re co rd in M r. B ec er ril’ s c an ce ll atio n o f r em o v al p ro ce ed in g re n d er ed co u n se l’ s erro r h arm l ess. 12 is s u e in to th e in d e f

in ite f u tu r e w h e r e f

u r th e rp r o c e e d in g s m a y b e r e q u ir e d to e n ab le M r . B e c e rr il to o b ta in th e r e lie f to w h ic h h e is e n title d . H o w m u c h b e tte rit w o u ld be for thi s c ou rtt o g etthe l aw ri gh tthe fi rs tt i m e. 1 I DI SS ENT.