CA8 on Evidence of Admission, Departure: Rodriguez-Quiroz v. Lynch

Rodriguez-Quiroz v. Lynch, Aug. 31, 2016 - "Francisco Rodriguez-Quiroz, a native and citizen of Mexico, was charged with being subject to removal as an alien present in the United States without inspection and without admission or parole. Following a total of twelve hearings spread over a period of some fifty-five months, an immigration judge (IJ) sustained the charge, denied Rodriguez’s request for adjustment of status, and granted his request for voluntary departure. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upheld the IJ’s order and dismissed the appeal. Rodriguez now petitions for review. We grant the petition and remand the case to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. ... We question whether a reasonable adjudicator could conclude that Rodriguez did not meet his burden of establishing by clear and convincing evidence that he was lawfully present pursuant to a prior admission. Rodriguez presented substantial documentary evidence that he remained in the United States throughout 2005, with the IJ and the BIA relying on the TECS-II document as evidence that he had departed from the United States. Once the TECS-II document is set aside, the record contains no evidence of a departure from the United States, leaving the draft and final I-213s as the only evidence that Rodriguez entered the United States without inspection and without admission or parole. The draft and final I-213s set forth different entry dates and—according to the BIA—“have several other differences as well.” Accordingly, we remand the case for the limited purpose of allowing Rodriguez to present evidence regarding the draft and final I-213s. The petition for review is granted, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We retain jurisdiction should there be another appeal."  

The audio of the oral argument is here.

[Hats off to Lisa Lodin Peralta and Nelson L. Peralta!]