This advisory describes how practitioners with clients whose DACA renewal is outside of processing time or whose biometrics appointment notice is delayed can elevate their cases for resolution with USCIS.
A noncitizen who is convicted of a “crime of domestic violence” is deportable. INA 237(a)(2)(E)(i), 8 USC 1227(a)(2)(E)(i). In Matter of H. Estrada the BIA reaffirmed that the categorical approach must be used to determine that the offense is a “crime of violence” under 18 USC § 16, but it held that the circumstance-specific approach can be used to determine whether the victim and defendant shared the required domestic relationship. Under that approach, the BIA found that ICE can use any reliable evidence, including evidence from outside the record of conviction, to try to meet its burden of proving the relationship.
In this practice advisory developed in consultation with the staff of the Judicial Council of California, we answer common questions about basic procedural and substantive issues that may arise in family court custody cases when SIJS findings are being requested.
The BIA stated that Cal PC § 273a(b) is not a deportable crime of child abuse, in Matter of Mendoza-Osorio.
This practice advisory describes the recent increase in RFEs and NOIDs in Special Immigrant Juvenile Status cases, in which USCIS is requesting documents from the underlying state court proceedings. The advisory details arguments against disclosing state court documents and information to USCIS, and provides guidance on setting up your SIJS petitions for success from the outset.
This advisory discusses how the Supreme Court's opinion in Johnson v. United States may affect selected offenses under California law, and what criminal defense and immigration advocates can do now.
Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) cases, involving a claim of abuse, abandonment or neglect against one parent while the child resides with the non-offending parent, are commonly referred to as one-parent cases. These cases, though permissible under the plain language of the statute as well as federal agency interpretation, have proved challenging particularly at the state court phase of the application process and at times before U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the agency that adjudicates SIJS petitions. This advisory is intended to be a primer for practitioners to help them successfully advocate for SIJS where one-parent SIJS claims are involved.