Lopez Orellana v. Garland "The question presented here is whether the Louisiana accessory-after-the-fact statute, LA.REV. STAT. § 14:25, is a categorical match for the generic federal offense...
USCIS, Sept. 18, 2024 "Effective Sept. 10, 2024, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services automatically extended the validity of Permanent Resident Cards (also known as Green Cards) to 36 months...
Singh v. Garland "Petitioner Varinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, seeks rescission of a removal order entered in absentia. We previously granted Singh’s petition because the government...
BIB Daily presents bimonthly PERM practice tips from Ron Wada , member of the Editorial Board for Bender’s Immigration Bulletin and author of the 10+ year series of BALCA review articles, “Shaping...
Castellanos-Ventura v. Garland "Petitioner Bessy Orbelina Castellanos-Ventura, a native and citizen of Honduras, seeks review of an April 19, 2021 decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA...
"Although the Hearing Transcript from July 15, 2008 indicates that the applicant's assault was committed against a police officer and that the applicant's actions resulted in scrapes and bruises to the police office, the Hearing Transcript states that the applicant was convicted of a misdemeanor and not a felony. Thus, the applicant was clearly convicted of simple assault under Maryland Code Art 27, § 12A(a) and (b), and not assault involving an aggravated dimension like assault on a police officer, under Maryland Code Art 27, § 12A(c). Furthermore, assault crimes involving aggravating factors in Maryland are generally covered by first degree assault, which includes assaults causing or attempting to cause serious bodily injury and assaults with a firearm. See Maryland Code, Criminal Law, §3-202. Upon reviewing the record and the statute of conviction, we find that the applicant's conviction was for simple assault and it is not a crime involving moral turpitude that renders the applicant inadmissible under section 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) of the Act. Moreover, because the applicant's conviction is not a crime involving moral turpitude, 8 C.F.R. 212.7(d) is not applicable to his case." - Matter of X-, July 18, 2014. [Hats off to Michelle N. Mendez, Senior Managing Attorney, Catholic Charities DC!]