Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Stanley Anozie Obi, A210 114 098 (BIA June 9, 2014)
Stanley Anozie Obi, A210 114 098 (BIA June 9, 2014)
there is no
support fr an aggravated flony fnding.
2
.
,, .
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
&
R
e
f
u
g
e
e
A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
|
w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Stanley Anozie Obi, A210 114 098 (BIA June 9, 2014)
,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW
UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT
HOUSTON. TEXAS
File: A210-114-098
In the Matter of
April 18, 2013
STANLEY ANOZIE OBI
)
)
)
)
IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS
RESPONDENT
CHARGES: Section 237(a)(2)(A)(i) of the Act: convicted of a crime involving
moral turpitude committed within five years after admission for
which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed.
APPLICATIONS: None.
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ROBERTO M. HINOJOSA
2020 Southwest Freeway 220
Houston, Texas 77098
ON BEHALF OF OHS: KIMANI EASON
Department of Homeland Security
126 Northpoint, Room 2020
Houston, Texas 77060
ORAL DECISION AND ORDER OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE
The respondent is a male native and citizen of Nigeria. On January 30,
2012, the Department of Homeland Security (OHS) issued a Notice to Appear (NTA)
charging that the respondent is subject to removal pursuant to Section 237(a)(2)(A)(i) of
the Act. On March 20, 2013, the respondent appeared with counsel, admitted to the
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
&
R
e
f
u
g
e
e
A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
|
w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
factual allegations contained in the NTA, paragraph 1, 2, 3, but denied factual allegation
4, and denied the ground of removability. On that day, the Government served on the
respondent's counsel the conviction document as well as the record of deportable alien.
The Government's submission was marked and entered into evidence as Exhibit 2 in
this case. Based on the Government's submission of Exhibit 2, the Court sustained the
ground of removabilit, as well as the factual allegations as alleged in the NT A
On April 4, 2013, the respondent submitted a motion to terminate. Prior to
the submission of the motion to terminate, the respondent was given the opportunity to
file any and all applications for relief from removal. Specifically, on the master calendar
hearing of March 20, 2013, the respondent, through counsel, requested a continuance
to allow the resolution of a writ that the respondent's counsel allegedly filed for purposes
of vacating the criminal conviction allegedly based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
However, respondent's counsel did not submit any material, documentation or evidence
to show the content of the writ that is currently pending. The only thing that the
respondent's counsel submitted was a docket sheet of the First Court of Appeals of
Texas indicating that there is a pending hearing regarding the respondent's motion.
While the Court had no clear record or evidence of what the writ was actually fr, and
there is no other evidence whatsoever to show that there is reason for the Court to
continue this case or otherwise set it over to await the outcome of the writ the Court did
not grant the respondent's motion to terminate and the individual hearing, therefore,
took place today on April 18, 2013.
On March 20, 2013, the respondent's counsel was also advised that today
would be the individual hearing for any and all applications for relief from removal.
Specifically, the Court ordered that any application for relief must be filed on or before
April 4, 2013, or else it would be deemed waived or abandoned. Respondent is from
A210-114-098 2 April 18, 2013
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
&
R
e
f
u
g
e
e
A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
|
w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Nigeria, and the respondent had not submitted any applications for relief, such as
asylum, withholding of removal, Convention Against Torture protection, from Nigeria.
Furthermore, the respondent did not submit any other application, such as cancellation
of removal, waiver of inadmissibility, or any other relief under the Act. On the day of the
individual hearing, the respondent's counsel also confirmed that based on the
respondent's criminal conviction, which is a crime involving moral turpitude and an
aggravated felony, the respondent is statutorily ineligible for any form of relief at this
time.
The respondent was also questioned by the Court and he acknowledged
that he understood his counsel's action and otherwise personally is aware of the
situation surrounding his removal, as well as the lack of any application for relief. While
the respondent has been found removable as charged, and the respondent had not
submitted any application for relief and is not statutorily eligible for any form of relief, at
this time, the Court will issue the following order.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the respondent be ordered removed from
the United States to Nigeria. Should the respondent fail to comply with the final order of
removal to Nigeria, the respondent shall be subject to additional civil and criminal
penalty. Specifically, the respondent could be fined up to $5,000 or at an amount set
specifically by the Court if respondent failed to comply with the final order of this Court.
In this case, the order as set by the Court would be $5,000, and the respondent could
be subject to additional criminal penalty for his failure to comply with the Court's order.
Please see the next page for electronic
signature
A210-114-098 3 April 18, 2013
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
&
R
e
f
u
g
e
e
A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
|
w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
I
A210-114-098
MIMI YAM
Immigration Judge
4 April 18, 2013
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
&
R
e
f
u
g
e
e
A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
|
w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
1 1
//s//
Inigration Judge MIMI YAM
yam on August 12, 2013 at 3:35 PM GMT
A210-114-098 5 April 18, 2013
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
&
R
e
f
u
g
e
e
A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e
C
e
n
t
e
r
|
w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t