U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals

Office of the Clerk

5/07 leesburg Pike. Suite 2000

Falls Church, Virginia 2204/

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

Lawrence, Jared S., Esq. OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - LVG
Jared Lawrence PC 3373 Pepper Lane
311 S State St. Suite 380 Las Vegas, NV 89120
Salt Lake City, UT 84111

Name: SAZO-HERNANDEZ, LEONIDAS A 206-497-081

Date of this notice: 3/6/2017

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.

Sincerely,

bOWtL Ca.AA)
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members:
KELLY, EDWARD F.

Use rteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit

www.irac.net/unpublished/index/

Cite as: Leonidas Sazo-Hernandez, A206 497 081 (BIA March 6, 2017)
 U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals

Office ofthe Clerk

5/07 leesburg Pike, Suite 2000

Falls Church, Virginia 2204/

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

SAZO-HERNANDEZ, LEONIDAS OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - LVG
A206-497-081 3373 Pepper Lane
NEVADA SOUTHERN DETENTION CENT Las Vegas, NV 89120
2190 E MESQUITE AVE
NV 89060

Name: SAZO-HERNANDEZ, LEONIDAS A 206-497-081

Date of this notice: 3/6/2017

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision in the above-referenced case. This copy is being
provided to you as a courtesy. Your attorney 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 from the United States or affirms an Immigration Judge's decision ordering that you
be removed, any petition for review of the attached decision must be filed with and received
by the appropriate court of appeals within 30 days of the date of the decision.

Sincerely,

DoYl.ltL c (1/\A)

Donna Carr
Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members:
KELLY, EDWARD F.

Userteam:'

Cite as: Leonidas Sazo-Hernandez, A206 497 081 (BIA March 6, 2017)
 10
'U.S. Department of Justice Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Executive Office for Immigration Review

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

File: A206 497 081 - Las Vegas, NV Date:

MAR - 6 2017
In re: LEONIDAS SAZO-HERNANDEZ a.k.a. Sazo Leonidas a.k.a. Leonidas Sazo

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

APPEAL

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Jared S. Lawrence, Esquire

APPLICATION: Remand

The respondent, a native and citizen of Guatemala, has appealed from the Immigration
Judge's November 2, 2016, decision finding the respondent's application for cancellation of
removal abandoned and ordering him removed. We review questions of law, discretion, and
judgment arising in appeals from decisions of Immigration Judges de novo, whereas we review
findings of fact in such appeals under a "clearly erroneous" standard. See 8 C.F.R.
I 003.1(d)(3).

On appeal counsel alleges that prior counsel provided ineffective assistance to the respondent
by failing to file his application for cancellation of removal by the date set by the Immigration
Judge, which failure led the Immigration Judge to deem the application abandoned. Counsel has
substantially complied with Matter of Lozada, 19 l&N Dec. 637 1988), in which we set out the
procedural requirements for stablishing a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. See ,
Respondent's December 2, 2016, Motion to Remand. We therefore conclude that the respondent
has established ineffective assistance below, and we therefore will remand the record to provide
the respondent the opportunity to file his relief application with the Immigration Judge.

Accordingly, the following order will be entered.

ORDER: The record is remanded for further proceedings consistent with the foregoing
opinion.

Cite as: Leonidas Sazo-Hernandez, A206 497 081 (BIA March 6, 2017)
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
IMMIGRATION COURT
3365 PEPPER LANE, SUITE 200
LAS VEGAS, NV 89120

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

lLAW
Pearson, Kristopher D
1173 S 250 W
Suite 311
Saint George, UT 84770

Date: Nov 2, 2016

File A206-497-081

In the Matter of:

SAZO-HERNANDEZ, LEONIDAS
/
_,/'
__ Attached
f is a copy of the written decision of the Immigration Judge.
This decision is final unless an appeal is taken to the Board of
Immigration Appeals. The enclosed copies of FORM EOIR 26,
Notice of Appeal, and FORM EOIR 27, Notc of Entry as Attorney or
Representative, properly executed, mus_p iyd with the Board of
Immigration Appeals on or before Of#. b.
The appeal must be accompanied by pr f of paid fee ($110.00).

Enclosed is a copy of the oral decision.

Enclosed is a transcript of the testimony of record.

You are granted until ________ to submit a brief

to this office in support of your appeal.

Opposing counsel is granted until to submit a

brief in opposition to the appeal.

Enclosed is a copy of the order/decision of the Inunigration Judge,

All papers filed with the Court shall be accompanied by proof

of service upon opposing counsel.

Sincerely,

UL
cc: HOEPPNER, MINDY
3373 Pepper Lane
Las Vegas, NV 89120
-- 4 l

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA
FILE: A206 497 081 )

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

)
IN THE MATIER OF ) IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
)
Leonidas Sazo-Hemandez, Respondent )
)

CHARGE: 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (the Act)-Present

without having been admitted or paroled

APPLICATIONS: Cancellation of removal for non-permanent resident; voluntary departure

ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF THE DHS:

Kristopher Pearson, Esquire Mindy Hoeppner

1173 South 250 West, Suite 311 Assistant Chief Counsel
St. George, UT 84770

WRITTEN DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE

The respondent is a 36-year-old male who is a native and citizen of Guatemala. The
Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") issued a charging document, the Notice to Appear
(NTA) dated September 12, 2016, charging the respondent with inadmissibility on the ground set
forth above. A copy of the NTA is included in the Record of Proceedings as Exhibit 1. The
respondent through counsel conceded inadmissibility as charged in the NTA See section
240(c)(2) of the Act. The Immigration Court designated Guatemala as the country for removal.

At a hearing on October 12, 2016, the respondent through counsel requested a continuance
so that he could prepare an application for cancellation of removal for certain non-permanent
residents (Form EOIR-42B). The respondent has two children who are U.S. citizens. The Court
then instructed that any application for cancellation of removal must be filed at the next master
calendar hearing--scheduled for today's date.

At today's hearing, the respondent's counsel advised that no application for cancellation of
removal was prepared for filing with the Immigration Court, and requested a further continuance
to prepare the application for relief. The Court did not find "good cause" for a further
continuance in this matter. 8 C.F.R. 1003.29. First, the respondent is presently being detained
by the DHS at the expense of the U.S. Government, and thus his case arises on a docket where
all applications for relief must be prepared and filed timely in accordance with the deadlines
provided by the Court. The record is clear that the respondent and counsel were on notice that
the purpose for today's hearing would be to enter a plea and to submit the application for
cancellation of removal. No written motion was made with the Court in advance of the hearing,
requesting additional time to prepare the application. Because no applications for relief have
been filed with the Court, the Court is not inclined to delay the removal proceedings further.

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center, LLC | www.irac.net

Under these circumstances, where the respondent had a reasonable opportunity to prepare
applications for relief but has not submitted any application, the Court finds that the opportunity to
file the application for cancellation of removal has been abandoned, pursuant to 8 C.F.R.
1003.3 l(c). The respondent appears statutorily eligible for post-conclusion voluntary departure
under section 240B(b) of the Act. However, he was uncertain as to whether his passport is valid,
and as to whether he could afford the return trip to Guatemala. He therefore has not established
by "clear and convincing evidence" that he has the means and intention to depart the United States
voluntarily. 8 C.F.R. 1240.26(c)(l)(iv). Accordingly, any request for post-conclusion
voluntary departure shall be denied. Based on the foregoing, the Court will enter the following
orders:

ORDERS

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that any application for cancellation of removal be DENIED,

as abandoned.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the respondent shall be removed from the United States
to Guatemala on the charge contained in the Notice to Appear.

DATE: Af .._.,..
/ v 0tl
>1 dO/ f, Jel;f,, i2
Immigration Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
THIS DOCU MENT WAS SERVED BY: MAIL{M)PERS (P)
TO: ( ) IL N ( )ALIEN C/9l CUST OFFICER
ALIEN REP{r)DHS
/
DATE: __/( (R-__BY: COURT STAFF
ATWc HMENTS: ( ) EOIR-33 ( ) EOI
( )LEGAL SERVICES LIST( )OTHER