Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/172132293/Edgar-Ortega-A045-624-720-BIA-Sept-23-2013
Timestamp: 2017-02-22 17:25:17
Document Index: 88212697

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1292', '§ 1227', '§ 1003', '§ 1101', '§ 2', '§ 237', '§ 2', '§ 237', '§ 101', '§ 237', '§ 10', '§ 101', '§ 237', '§ 2', '§ 1', '§ 101', '§ 237', '§ 237', '§ 101', '§ 237', '§ 101', '§ 10', '§ 16', '§ 2', '§2', '§2', '§ 2', '§ 16', '§ 2', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 2', '§ 16', '§ 2', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 10', '§ 237', '§ 101', '§ 101', '§ 237', '§ 10', '§ 2', '§ 2', '§ 16', '§ 16', '§ 10', '§237', '§ 101', '§ 237', '§ 10', '§ 2']

Edgar Ortega, A045 624 720 (BIA Sept. 23, 2013) | Assault
BrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksNews & MagazinesSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoinSteinfeld, Jefrey B., Esq.Jefrey B. Steinfeld, P.C. 27 Warren Street, Suite 302 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Name: ORTEGA, EDGAR U.S. Department of Justice Executive Ofce fr Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals Ofce of the Clerk 5107 Leesburg Pike. Suite 2000 Fals Ch11rch, Vrginia 22041 OHS/ICE Ofice of Chief Counsel - NEW P.O. Box 1898 Newark, NJ 07101 A 045-624-720 Date of this notice: 9/23/2013 Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-refrenced case. Enclosure Panel Members: Pauley, Roger Sincerely, [C { t Donna Carr Chief Clerk Lulseges Userteam: Docket I
ORTEGA, EDGAR A045-624-720 ICE/ESSEX COUNT JAIL 354 DOREMUS AVENUE NEWARK, NJ 07105 Name: ORTEGA, EDGAR U.S. Department of Justice Executive Ofce fr Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals Ofce of the Clerk 5107 leesburg Pik, Suite 2000 Fals Church, Vrginia 2204 I OHS/ICE Ofice of Chief Counsel - NEW P .0. Box 1898 Newark, NJ 07101 A 045-624-720 Date of this notice: 9/23/2013 Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision in the above-refrenced case. This copy is being provided to you as a courtesy. Your attorey or representative has been served with this decision pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1292.S(a). If the attached decision orders that you be removed fom the United States or afrms an Imigration Judge's decision ordering that you be removed, any petition fr review of the attached decision must be fled with and received by the appropriate court of appeals within 30 days of the date of the decision. Enclosure Panel Members: Pauley, Roger Sincerely, DC caA
Donna Carr Chief Clerk Lulseges Useream: Docket I
/" •. - . ' l U.S. Deparent of Justice Executive Ofc fr Imigation Review Decision of te Boad of Im igation Appeals Falls Chuch, Viginia 22041 File: A045 624 720 - Newak, NJ I re: EDGAR ORTEGA I REMOVAL PROCEEDIGS APPEA AND MOTION Date: ON BEHALF OF RESPONENT: Jefey B. Steinfeld, Esquire APPLICATION: Continuace; remad :l| ZJ 2013 On June 4, 2013, an Immigation Judge ordered the respondent removed to Per as a alien convicted of a aggravated flony. See section 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the Immigration ad Nationalit Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). The respondent fled a timely appeal of te Immigration Judge's decision. On Augst 1, 2013, the respondent fled a motion to remad based on a state cou ruling reducing hs sentence fr the criminal conviction uderlying te chage of removability. The Depaent of Homeland Secuity (DHS) has not fled a response to the respondent's appeal or motion. The motion will be gated and te record will be remaded. We review an Immigration Judge's fndings of fct fr clear eror, but questions of law, discretion, and judgent, ad all oter issues in appeals, de novo. 8 C.F.R. §§ 1003. l(d)(3)(i), (ii). The DHS chages the respondent as removable pursuat to section 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) of te Act, as a alien convicted of a aggravated flony under section 101(a)(43)(F) of te Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F). Section 10l(a)(43)(F), in tu, defnes a aggravated flony as a crime of violence fr which the term of imprisonent is at least one yea. The respondent was convicted on July 14, 2006, of two counts of aggravated assault in te tird degree, in violaton of N.J. Stat. § 2C:12-lb(7); he was initially sentenced to fve years of imprsonent fr each count, to r concurently. Atached to his motion to remad, te respondent presents evidence that on Jue 25, 2013, he was resentenced to 3 days of jal confnement fr each assault ofense. See Resp. Motion, Tab C. The respondent terefre agues tat because his sentence was reduced to uder 1 year, he is no longer removable as a alien convicted of a aggavated flony. In Matter of Cota-Vargas, 23 I&N Dec. 849 (BIA 2005), we held that a tal court's decision to modif a alien's crimina sentence nunc pro te was entitled to fll faith ad credit by Imigation Judges ad this Boad, ad tat te modifed sentence would be valid fr immigation puposes regadless of te reaons behind the sentence reduction. See also Matter of Song, 23 I&N Dec. 173 (BIA 2001 ); Matter of Martin, 18 l&N Dec. 226 (BIA 1982). Based on te evidence of the respondent's sentence reduction, we fnd tat a remad fr fer consideration as to te respondent's removabilit ad eligibility fr relief fom remova is I
<. •, • • • A045 624 720 appropriate. See Matte· ofCota-|a·gas, sup·a, Matte· ofSong, sup·a. As the respondent's removabilit is now a open question, it would be premature to addess te oter aguents advaced in his appeal at tis time. Accordingly, te fllowing order shall be issued. ORER: Te respondent's motion to remand is ganted ad the record is remaded to the Immigation Cou fr fer proceedings consistent wit the fregoing opinion ad fr the ent of a new decision. 2 I
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW IMMIGRATION COURT NEW ARK, NEW JERSEY File No.: A045 624 720 In the Matter of DETAINED Edgar ORTEGA, In Removal Proceedings Respondent. CHARGES: INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii)- Aggravated Felony - Crime of Violence APPLICATIONS: Termination Continuance ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT Jefrey B. Steinfeld, Esq. 27 Wanen Street, Ste. 302 Hackensack, NJ 07601 ON BEHALF OF DHS Mauel Ramirez, Esq. Ofce of Chief Counsel/ICE/OHS 970 Broad Street, Room 1104B Newark, New Jersey 07102 DECISION AND ORER OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE Mr. Ortega is a native and citizen of Per who was admitted to te United States ("U.S.") at Newark, New Jersey, on or about July 25, 1996, as a lawfl permaent resident. Exhibit l. On or about July 14, 2006, Mr. Ortega was convicted in the New Jersey Superior Court at Passaic County of two counts of aggravated assault in the third degree, in violation of N.J. Stat § 2C: 12-1 b(7). He was sentenced to 5 years of imprisonment on each count with the sentences to run concurrently. Exhibit 3. On August 15, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") issued Mr. Ortega a Notice to Appear ("NTA") chaging him with deportability under IA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) a an alien convicted of an aggravated flony as defned in IA § 101(a)(43){F) (crime of violence). Exhibit 1. On Mach 5, 2013, DHS issued a Form I-261, Additional Charges of Inadmissibility/Deportability, charging Mr. Ortega with deporability under IA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) as a alien convicted of an aggravated flony as defned in IA § 10l(a)(43)(U) (attempt or conspiracy to commit a aggravated flony). Exhibit IA. Though counsel, Mr. Ortega admited all the fctal allegations contained in the NTA but denied the charges contained on the NTA a amended by the Form 1-261. Counsel fr Mr. Ortega briefd the issue of whether Mr. Ortega's conviction fr aggravated assault is an aggravated felony a defned in IA § § 101(a)(43)(F) or 10l(a)(43)(U). In hearings befre the Cour, both parties presented arguments on that issue. At a hearing on April 24, 2013 the Cour sustained both charges. The Court reset the matter to allow Mr. Ortega to submit applications fr I
.• relief fom removal. At a continued hearing on May 8, 2013, counsel fr Mr. Ortega advised the Court that Mr. Ortega would not be fling any applications fr relief from removal but wished to appeal the Court's decision regarding the charge on the NTA. He also requested a continuance to pursue a recently fled motion fr post-conviction relief (PCR) which was pending with the New Jersey Superior Court. Counsel fr DHS opposed the request fr continuance, arguing that the PCR motion was collateral to these proceedings and the outcome was speculative. The Court denied the motion fr a continuance to pursue the motion fr PCR and reserved decision. Legal Standard The Immigration and Nationality Act provides fr the removal of an alien who is convicted of an aggravated flony at any time after admission. INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii). The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has held that in determining whether an ofense is an aggravated flony under the Act, courts must presumptively apply the frmal categorical approach, fcusing on the statutory defnition of the ofense and not the paricular fcts underlying the conviction. Stubbs v. Atty Gen., 452 F.3d 251, 254 (3d Cir. 2006); Singh v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 144, 163 (3d Cir. 2004) (applying the approach employed in Taylor v. US, 495 U.S. 575, 599-600 (1990)); Francis v. Reno, 269 F.3d 162, 171 (3d Cir. 2001 ). In applying the categorical approach, courts must ascertain the least culpable conduct necessary to sustain a conviction under the statute. Denis v. Ally Gen., 633 F .3d 20 l, 206 (3d Cir. 201 1 ). Cours may depr1 fom the frmal categorical approach where the statute of conviction is "phrased in the disjunctive or structured in outline frm." Singh, supra. at 163-64; see Stubbs, supra, at 254. The statute need not be frmally divided in order to be considered disjuctive­
"[r]ather, the key is whether the provision is disjunctive in a relevant sense." Garcia v. At ' Gen., 462 F.3d 287, 293 n. 9 (3d Cir. 2006) (citing Singh, supra, at 163). Under the "modifed" categorical approach, cours may "inquir[ e] into the fcts of the underlying conviction" fr the limited purpose of determining under which part of the divisible statute the respondent has been convicted. Knapik v. Ashcrof, 384 F.3d 84, 92 n.8 (3d Cir. 2004 ); Matter of Vargas-Sarmiento, 23 I&N Dec. 651, 654 (BIA 2004 ). In doing so, te cour is permitted to examine the record of conviction, which includes the charging document and the plea colloquy. See Stubbs, supra, at 254; Singh, supra, at 163; see also Jean Louis v. Att' Gen., 582 F.3d 46, 472 (3d Cir. 2009) ("the fral record of conviction .. . could include the charging document, the terms of the plea agreement or transcript of the colloquy between judge ad defndant in which the fctual basis fr the plea is confrmed by the defndant, or some comparable judicial record of this infrmation") (citing Shepard v. US., 544 U.S. 13, 26 (2006)). Having determined which portion of the statute the respondent was convicted of, what remains is whether the respondent's conviction necessarily constitutes an aggravated flony under the Act. Restrepo v. Atty Gen., 617 F.3d 787, 791 (3d Cir. 2010); Stubbs, supra, at 25-56; see Denis, supra, at 206. Analysis The Cour fnds that good cause has not been established to continue the case fr adjudication of the pending PCR motion. Such a motion is collateral to these proceedings and its 2 I
.. outcome is speculative. For these reasons, the Court denied the motion to continue for adjudication of the PCR motion. The primary issue in this case is whether Mr. Ortega's conviction fr aggravated assault in violation of N .J. Stat. § 2C: 12-1 b(7) is an aggravated flony as defned in INA § 1O1(a)(43)(F) as a crime of violence fr which the term of imprisonment is at least one year and/or whether his conviction is an aggravated flony as defned in IA § 101 (a)(43)(U), making him removable under INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii). For the reasons below, the Court will sustain the charge under INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) based upon INA § 101(a)(43)(F) and will not reach the charge based upon INA§ l 0l (a)(43)(U). An alien is deportable under INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) if he has be
n convicted of an aggravated flony as defned in INA § 101(a)(43 )(F), which states that Ha crime of violence (as defned in section 16 of Title 18, but not including a purely political ofense) fr which the term of imprisonment at least one yea" is an aggravated flony. INA § 10l(a)(43)(F). Under 18 U .S.C. § 16, a crime of violence is defned as: (a) an ofense that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical frce against the person or propery of another, or (b) any other ofense that is a flony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical frce against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the ofense. In this case, on July 14, 2006, Mr. Ortega was convicted in the New Jersey Superior Court, Passaic County, of two counts of aggravated assault in the third degree in violation of N.J. Stat § 2C: 12-1 b(7), and was sentenced to fve years of imprisonment fr each count to be run concurrently. (See Exhibit 3, Judgment of Conviction.) N.J. Stat. §2C:12-lb(7) states that, A person is guilty of aggravated assault if he: (7) Attempts to cause signifcant bodily injury to another or causes signifcat bodily injury purposely or knowingly or, under circumstances manifsting extreme indiference to the value of human lif recklessly causes such signifcat bodily injury. N.J. Stat. §2C:l2-lb(7)(2009). The judgment of conviction indicates that Respondent was originally charged with 6 separate ofenses, but ultimately pied guilty to only the frst and furth counts, which were aended to aggravated assault in the third degree in violation of N.J. Stat. § 2C:l2-lb(7).i Thus, as "the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical frce" (18 U.S.C. § 16(a)) is not an element of N.J. Stat § 2C:l2-lb(7), 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is the relevant defnition of "crime of violence" which must be considered here. The Court concludes that his conviction on each count categorically constitutes a conviction fr an aggravated flony. The least culpable conduct criminalized by Mr. Ortega's statute of conviction is recklessly causing signifcant bodily injury "under circumstances manifsting extreme indiference to the value of human lif." DHS relies on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals' decision in Aguilar v. Att' Gen., 663 F.3d 692 (3d Cir. 2011) in arguing that Mr. Ortega's aggravated assault conviction constitutes a cnme of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16(b). In 3 I
. . Aguilar, the Third Circuit, afer reviewing and cataloguing the relevant precedents, held that crimes with a mens rea, or mental state, of recklessness do not necessarily fll outside of § l 6(b ); rather, the key issue is whether the actus reus of the ofense, by itself, creates a substantial risk that physical force may be intentionally used in the commission of that ofense. Aguilar, 663 F.3d at 698. The Court fnds that the portion of the statute most relevant to the § 16(b) analysis is not that the defndant �'recklessly causes such injury," but that the defndant commits an assault "under circumstances manifsting extreme indiference to the value of human lif." Regardless of whether an injury ultimately resulted and the mens rea accompanying such injury, the Court fnds that a person who commits an assault "under circumstances manifsting extreme indiference to the value of human lif" necessarily creates a substantial risk tat physical frce may be intentionally used in the commission of the crime. Aguilar, 663 F .3d at 698-99. See also Briolo v. Attorney General of the United States, 2013 WL l 010634 (3d Cir. Mar. 15, 2013 )(Unpublished). This situation is notably diferent than the acts at issue in cases of "pure recklessness" fund not to constitute crimes of violence under § l 6(b ), such as the DUI ofense in Leocal v. Aschrof, in which the Supreme Court reasoned that a person driving under the infuence cannot be said to "risk having to 'use' physical frce against another person," 543 U.S. 1, 11 (2004), and reckless buring in Tran v. Gonzalez, in which the Third Circuit reasoned that the risk involved in reckless buring is not the use of intentional frce but rather the risk that the fre will spread and harm property. 414 F.3d 464, 465 (3d Cir. 2005). In Aguilar, the Third Circuit characterized "pure recklessness" crimes as those in which "the mens rea of a crime "lack[ s] an intent or willingness to use frce or cause harm at all." 663 F.3d at 697-698 (quoting US v. Parson, 955 F.2d 858, 966 (3d Cir. 1992)). In far contrast fom such "pure recklessness" crimes, which "do not fall under § l 6(b) fr the very reason that the perpetrator runs "no risk of intentionally using frce in committing the crime," Aguilar, 663 F.3d at 698 (quoting Tran, 414 F.3d at 465), a conviction of aggravated assault under this subsection of 2C:l2-lb{l) requires "extreme indiference to the value of human lif," and indeed, requires such a willingness to use frce or cause harm tat inherent in the conduct there is a "probability as opposed to a mere possibility of serious bodily injury." See New Jersey Pater Jury Instructions, Aggravated Assault, Serious Bodily Injury, N.J.S.A. § 2C:l2-lb(l) at 2. In this way, aggravated assault under this subsection of 2C: 12-1 b(7) - because it entails complete indiference to human lif and thus a willingness of the perpetrator to risk the application of frce in the commission of the crime - is akin to the classic § l 6(b) example of burglary discussed in Aguilar and Leoco/
1 and to reckless sexual assault, which Aguilar held to be a crime of violence under § 16(b).
2 1 As the Third Circuit stated in Aguilar, [A] burglary would be covered under 16(b) not because the ofense can be committed in a generally reckless wa or because someone may be injured, but because burglar, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that the burglar will use force against a victim in completing the crime. Aguilar, 663 F.3d at 698 (quoting leocal, 543 U.S. at IO) (emphasis in original). 2 The Court has considered the crime of driving under the infuence in leocal, which the Supreme Court held is not a crime of violence under § l 6b, and the possibility that some frm of driving under the infuence, coupled with the infiction of signifcant bodily injury, could fll under aggravated assault in violation of 2C: 12-1 b(7). However, the 4 I
• ' For the fregoing reasons, the Court finds that each of Mr. Ortega's convictions fr aggravated assault under N.J. Stat § 2C: 12-1 b(7) arc convictions fr a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) in that the convictions are fr a felony that, "by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical frce against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the ofense." 18 U.S.C. § 16(b). Accordingly, the Court fnds that M. Ortega has been convicted of an aggravated flony as defned in INA § 10l(a)(43)(F) and will sustain the charge of removability under INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii). The Court will not reach the issue with regard to the charge of aggravated flony as defned in INA§ 101(a)(43)(U) as the Com1 has concluded that Mr. Ortega's conviction on each count meets the defnition of an aggravated flony contained INA § 101(a)(43)(F). As discussed above, Mr. Ortega did not request any relief fom removal. The Court does not doubt that Mr. Ortega has accrued many equities during his time in the United States. Unfrtunately, because he has been convicted of an aggravated flony, the Cour is not able to consider those equities. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Respondent be removed fom the United States to Peru on the charge of deportability under INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) (as defned in INA § 10l(a)(43)(F)) as contained on the Notice to Appear. Date MARGARET R. RICHENBERG Immigration Judge i The judgment of conviction indicates that Respondent was originally charged with 6 separate ofenses, but ultimately pied guilty to only the frst and furh counts, which were amended to aggravated assault in violation of N .J. Stat. § 2C: 12-1 b(7). The plea transcript reveals that the state moved to amend the frst count during the plea hearing, with the agreement of Mr. Ortega's counsel, to read: ... Edgar Ortega, on or about the 13th day of March 2005, in the City of Paterson, in the county of Passaic, and within the jurisdiction of this Cour, did purposely or knowingly cause signifcant bodily injury to Eduado Godinez, or did recklessly additional element of proving depraved indiference to the value of human lif distinguishes the conduct criminalized here fom that criminalized in Leocal and brings the instant statute into the ambit of a crime of violence. 5 I
� \"".•·\ For the fregoing reasons, the Court fnds that each of Mr. Ortega's convictions fr aggravated assault under NJ. Stat § 2C: 12-1 b(7) are convictions fr a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) in that the convictions are fr a flony that, "by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical frce against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the ofense." 18 U.S.C. § 16(b ). Accordingly, the Court fnds that Mr. Ortega has been convicted of an aggravated flony as defned in INA § 10l(a)(43)(F) and will sustain the charge of removability under INA §237(a)(2)(A)(iii). The Court will not reach the issue with regard to the charge of aggravated flony as defned in INA § IOI(a)(43)(U) as the Court has concluded that Mr. Ortega's conviction on each count meets the defnition of an aggravated flony contained INA § 101(a)(43)(F). As discussed above, Mr. Ortega did not request ay relief fom removal. The Court does not doubt tat Mr. Ortega has accrued many equities during his time in the United States. Unfrtunately, because he has been convicted of an aggravated flony, the Court is not able to consider those equities. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Respondent be removed fom the United States to Peru on the charge of deporability under INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii) (as defned in INA § 10l(a)(43)(F)) as contained on the Notice to Appea. Date ���a � MAR
T R. Immigration Judge i The judgment of conviction indicates that Respondent was originally chaged with 6 separate ofenses, but ultimately pied guilty to only te frst ad furth counts, which were amended to aggravated assault in violation of NJ. Stat. § 2C:12-lb(7). The plea transcript reveals that the state moved to amend the frst count during the plea heaing, with the agreement of Mr. Ortega's counsel, to read: ... Edgar Ortega, on or about the 13th day of March 2005, in the City of Paterson, in the county of Passaic, and within the jurisdiction of this Cour, did purposely or knowingly cause signifcant bodily injury to Eduardo Godinez, or did recklessly additional element of proving depraved indiference to the value of human life distinguishes the conduct criminalized here fom that criminalized in leocaJ and brings the instant statute into the ambit of a crime of violence. 5 I
Sign up to vote on this titleUsefulNot usefulEdgar Ortega, A045 624 720 (BIA Sept. 23, 2013) by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC0.0 (0)EmbedDownloadDescriptionIn this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) granted the respondent’s motion to remand in light of evidence indicating that he was resentenced from five years’ to three days...In this unpublished decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) granted the respondent’s motion to remand in light of evidence indicating that he was resentenced from five years’ to three days’ confinement for each offense that was previously found to qualify as an aggravated felony crime of violence. The decision was written by Member Roger Pauley. Interests: Types, Government & PoliticsRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentShow moreShow less
RelatedAndrei Jose Picado, A200 440 226 (BIA Sept. 25, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCDelfino Flores-Sanchez, A201 101 216 (BIA Sept. 27, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCClaudette Collen Hubbard, A030 085 111 (BIA Oct. 8, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCJose Luis Ugas Gil, A078 903 173 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCLamin Manjang, A096 803 746 (BIA Oct. 23, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCSebastian Lopez-Vasquez, A087 676 888 (BIA Sept. 6, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCSalvador Hernandez-Garcia, A097 472 829 (BIA Sept. 20, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCOscar Giovanni Castro Rosa, A205 828 164 (BIA Sept. 25, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCDavid Antonio Lara-Torres, A094 218 294 (BIA Jan. 28, 2014)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCVictor Enrique Tally-Barrios, A041 736 376 (BIA Oct. 8, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCMaria Isabel Guzman-Sanchez, A087 118 694 (BIA Oct. 23, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCJuan Aguilar-Perez, A027 190 905 (BIA Sept. 13, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCAhmed Nadeem Malik, A092 006 532 (BIA Dec. 17, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCVictor Manuel Parada-Villegas, A091 223 049 (BIA Sept. 23, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCRaul Eduardo Juarez, A201 215 858 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCRicardo Cisneros, A075 789 006 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCMiguel Augusto Ixpec-Chitay, A097 535 400 (BIA Sept. 16, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCPablo Travieso-Izquierdo, A087 518 131 (BIA Aug. 12, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCMerton David Lopez, A091 085 417 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCRony Vladimir Monge, A205 503 682 (BIA Oct. 3, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCPhillip Andrew Murray, A055 213 731 (BIA Sept. 20, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCAnna Magdalena Bojko, A089 059 545 (BIA Sept. 30, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCWilliam Noe Perez-Cortez, A205 383 123 (BIA Sept. 25, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCJaved Anwar, A077 044 013 (BIA Dec. 30, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCJorge Antonio Haro Pena, A095 727 770 (BIA Dec. 17, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCGuadalupe Rondin-Nieves, A087 756 633 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCOliver Garcia Guzman, A043 144 667 (BIA Aug. 20, 2013)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCSergio Alberto Macal-Ventura, A200 589 069 (BIA Feb. 20, 2014)by Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLCSimilar to Edgar Ortega, A045 624 720 (BIA Sept. 23, 2013)Skip carouselAndrei Jose Picado, A200 440 226 (BIA Sept. 25, 2013)Delfino Flores-Sanchez, A201 101 216 (BIA Sept. 27, 2013)Claudette Collen Hubbard, A030 085 111 (BIA Oct. 8, 2013)Jose Luis Ugas Gil, A078 903 173 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)Lamin Manjang, A096 803 746 (BIA Oct. 23, 2013)Sebastian Lopez-Vasquez, A087 676 888 (BIA Sept. 6, 2013)Salvador Hernandez-Garcia, A097 472 829 (BIA Sept. 20, 2013)Oscar Giovanni Castro Rosa, A205 828 164 (BIA Sept. 25, 2013)David Antonio Lara-Torres, A094 218 294 (BIA Jan. 28, 2014)Victor Enrique Tally-Barrios, A041 736 376 (BIA Oct. 8, 2013)Maria Isabel Guzman-Sanchez, A087 118 694 (BIA Oct. 23, 2013)Juan Aguilar-Perez, A027 190 905 (BIA Sept. 13, 2013)Ahmed Nadeem Malik, A092 006 532 (BIA Dec. 17, 2013)Victor Manuel Parada-Villegas, A091 223 049 (BIA Sept. 23, 2013)Raul Eduardo Juarez, A201 215 858 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)Ricardo Cisneros, A075 789 006 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)Miguel Augusto Ixpec-Chitay, A097 535 400 (BIA Sept. 16, 2013)Pablo Travieso-Izquierdo, A087 518 131 (BIA Aug. 12, 2013)Merton David Lopez, A091 085 417 (BIA Dec. 13, 2013)Rony Vladimir Monge, A205 503 682 (BIA Oct. 3, 2013)Phillip Andrew Murray, A055 213 731 (BIA Sept. 20, 2013)Anna Magdalena Bojko, A089 059 545 (BIA Sept. 30, 2013)William Noe Perez-Cortez, A205 383 123 (BIA Sept. 25, 2013)Javed Anwar, A077 044 013 (BIA Dec. 30, 2013)Jorge Antonio Haro Pena, A095 727 770 (BIA Dec. 17, 2013)Guadalupe Rondin-Nieves, A087 756 633 (BIA Aug. 30, 2013)Oliver Garcia Guzman, A043 144 667 (BIA Aug. 20, 2013)Sergio Alberto Macal-Ventura, A200 589 069 (BIA Feb. 20, 2014)Emmanuel Peterson Dontoh, A088 949 492 (BIA Aug. 12, 2013)Safraz Khan, A043 452 893 (BIA Aug. 14, 2013)Edgar Ortega, A045 624 720 (BIA Sept. 23, 2013)