Skip to main content

Prosecutorial Discretion – Case Administratively Closed:

Case #1: We represented a client from Guyana who entered the United States with a visitor visa.  He decided to overstay in the U.S. because his parents and sibling were all in the U.S. with lawful permanent resident status.  He did not obtain permanent resident status because he aged-out (was over age 21) and could not obtain lawful permanent resident status as a derivative through his parents.  My client was place in removal proceedings on the grounds that he had an immigration violation (in the U.S. without valid visa).  Since he was age 21 and had no arrest or convictions, we asked the Office of Chief Counsel to consider granting our client prosecutorial discretion and administratively close his removal case.  The Office of Chief Counsel reviewed the evidence we submitted to document our client’s hardship and granted our request for prosecutorial discretion.  Our client’s case is now administratively closed but he may seek to reopen his case at any time if he is eligible for relief to seek lawful status in the U.S.  To view the redacted copies of our winning decision in this case, CLICK HERE.

Case #2: Our client from St-Kitts-Nevis was a lawful permanent resident since 1988.  She signed up to vote in the U.S. after being advised by a voter registration volunteer that was eligible to register to vote since she was a permanent resident for over 20 years.  When she received a voter registration card, she thought she was required to vote in the U.S.  When she applied for U.S. citizenship and she informed the immigration officer that she voted – he placed her in immigration removal proceedings.  Our client had no relief from removal.  We applied for prosecutorial discretion with the Office of Chief Counsel and after they considered our client’s action of voting, the local government error of issuing the voter’s registration card and our client’s good character.  The Office of Chief Counsel granted prosecutorial discretion and no longer pursued removal proceedings after my client and the immigration judge administratively closed the removal case.  To view the redacted copies of our winning decision in this case, CLICK HERE.

Post-Conviction Relief – Criminal Charges Vacated – Removal/Deportation Case Terminated:

Case #3: We represented a native from Guyana who has lawful permanent resident status in the United States.  Soon after entering the United States, he was convicted of child abuse and contributing to the delinquency of a minor.  He was placed in removal proceedings by Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) after being detained during a regular visit to his probation officer.  We advised our client to seek post-conviction relief to get his criminal case vacated through hiring a criminal defense attorney.  He was successful in getting his criminal case vacated and in turn the immigration judge terminated the removal proceedings against him.  He continues to live and work in the United States.  To view the redacted copies of our winning decision in this case, CLICK HERE.

I-751 Judicial Review of Denied Removal of Conditional Status – Judge Terminated Case:

Case #4:  Our client was married to a U.S. citizen and received a conditional (2 years) green card.  When it was time to file the I-751 to remove the conditions from his green card, he was no longer married to his U.S. citizen wife.  Our office filed I-751 seeking a waiver but the immigration officer denied the I-751 claiming the marriage was not good-faith.  Our client was placed in removal/deportation proceedings.  We filed another I-751 with additional evidence to prove our client entered his marriage with good-faith and his marriage was not for the purpose of gaining an immigration benefit.  We had another interview with immigration and the I-751 was approved.  The immigration judge agreed that the I-751 waiver demonstrated a good-faith marriage and terminated the removal/deportation proceedings and our client received an unconditional 10 years green card.  To view the redacted copies of our winning decision in this case, CLICK HERE.

Leave a Reply