Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Silveira, Matthew J. Jones Day 555 California St., 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 90280
OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel LVG 3373 Pepper Lane Las Vegas, NV 89120
A 029249620
Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case. Sincerely,
DOYUtL ct2tVt.)
Donna Carr Chief Clerk
Enclosure
Panel Members: Kendall-Clark, Molly
Trane
Userteam: Docket
Cite as: Erwin Stuardo Vivar-Flores, A029 249 620 (BIA Sept. 10, 2013)
,,
-i
File:
Date:
SEP 1 0 2013
CHARGE: Notice: Sec. 237(a)(2)(A)(iii), I& N Act [8 U.S.C. 1227 (a)(2)(A)(iii)] Convicted of aggravated felony (as defined in section 10l(a)(43)(G))
APPLICATION: Termination
appeal from the Immigration Judge's March 29, 2004, decision ordering him removed from the United States to Guatemala. On April 8, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted the respondent's petition for review of our July 30, 2004, decision, and remanded
The respondent's case was originally before us on July 30, 2004, when we dismissed his
the record for clarification. On July 14, 2009, we provided clarification and again dismissed the respondent's appeal. The matter is now before us pursuant to the November 20, 2012, decision of the Ninth Circuit. Circuit's second remand order. We will terminate removal proceedings in accordance with the Ninth
"was required to consider what term of imprisonment was imposed" on the respondent. It further concluded that "no actual sentence was imposed" on the respondent by the criminal court in this as charged and removal proceedings will be terminated. Accordingly, the following orders will be entered.2
In its November 20, 2012, decision, the Ninth Circuit found as a legal matter that the Board
case.1 Given the court's decision in this case, we conclude that the respondent is not removable
1 We also note that the 364-day term of imprisonment ultimately ordered as a condition of probation does not support the charge because it is less than the 1 year required under section 10l(a)(43)(G) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G).
2 We decline to address the respondent's request for the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") to facilitate his return to the United States because neither the Board nor the
Immigration Judge possesses jurisdiction to resolve that request, which the respondent may raise directly with the DHS. See ICE Policy Directive Number 11061.1, "Facilitating the Return to (continued ... )
w;;.
xx
Cite as: Erwin Stuardo Vivar-Flores, A029 249 620 (BIA Sept. 10, 2013)
"
;. n.w .... (
iJ.. .o . .
.k
ORDER: The Board's decisions dated July 30, 2004, and July 14, 2009, are vacated. FURTHER ORDER: The removal proceedings are tenninated and the record is returned to the Immigration Court without further action.
<.....
www.ice.gov/about/offices/enforcement-removal-operations/ero-outreach/faq.htm.
2 ( continued) the United States of Certain Lawfully Removed Aliens," available at http://www.ice.gov/ doclib/foia/dro_policy_memos/11061.1_current_policy_facilitating_return. pdf; see also http://
Cite as: Erwin Stuardo Vivar-Flores, A029 249 620 (BIA Sept. 10, 2013)