Opinion ID: 2975164
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Privilege to Obtain Counsel

Text: Even assuming that petitioner did not voluntarily waive his statutory privilege to obtain counsel,3 petitioner is not entitled to relief because he failed to show prejudice. To establish a due process violation, an alien must demonstrate prejudice. See Vasha v. Gonzales, 410 F.3d 863, 872 (Moore, J) (requiring proof of prejudice); id. at 876-77 (Sutton, J., concurring) (concluding no due process violation because no prejudice). Here, petitioner does not offer any evidence or argument for why he suffered prejudice. Petitioner admitted that he could not afford legal counsel and he has 2 We exercise jurisdiction over petitioner’s due process claims because 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) does not bar constitutional claims. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D). 3 An alien may voluntarily waive his right to counsel. See Nsue-Bisa v. Ashcroft, 98 Fed. Appx. 436, 438 (6th Cir. 2004); Choueib v. INS, No. 88-3553, 1989 WL 45148, at  (6th Cir. May 4, 1989); Farrokhi v. U.S. INS, 900 F.2d 697, 701 (4th Cir. 1990); In re Gutierrez, 16 I&N Dec. 226, 228 (BIA 1977). -7- No. 06-4231 K.E. v. Gonzales not suggested that he would have been able to obtain free legal counsel, or that even if he had obtained such counsel, that it potentially would have made a difference in the outcome of the proceeding. More important, petitioner had the same amount of time between the initial hearing and the continuation of the removal proceedings as he would have received had the IJ continued the proceedings to permit petitioner to obtain counsel: the IJ continued the proceedings in any event until October 12 so that petitioner could file an application for asylum. Therefore, petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating prejudice.