Andrew D. Stine, P.A. - Florida Criminal Defence Attorney

(U.S. 9th Cir., Administrative Law, Immigration Law) In a petition for review of the denial of petitioner's asylum application, the petition is denied where: 1) the ineffectiveness of petitioner's former counsel's assistance was not plain on its face; 2) petitioner did not suffer any personal persecution, and his claim for asylum was time-barred; and 3) substantial evidence supported the Immigration Judge's finding that changed conditions in Nepal mitigated against any fear of persecution if petitioner returned to Nepal.

(U.S. 7th Cir., Administrative Law, Government Law, Immigration Law) Petition for review BIA's decision that petitioners' untimely applications and failure to provide the required biometrics meant they had abandoned their applications for relief is denied where: 1) the petitioners were given ample time to file their applications for relief and provide biometrics and did not have good cause for their delay; and 2) the IJ did not abuse his discretion in denying their motion for a continuance; and 3) IJ did not abuse his discretion in denying their requests for relief because of their failure to comply with these application prerequisites.

(U.S. 9th Cir., Administrative Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Immigration Law) Petition for review of the BIA's denial of petitioner's asylum application is granted in part where the court was required to remand to the BIA to address the questions of whether petitioner would be in danger of persecution on account of his religion or would be entitled to other relief. However, the petition is denied in part where petitioner's credit card fraud in violation of Cal. Penal Code section 532a(1) constituted a crime of moral turpitude.

(U.S. 1st Cir., Administrative Law, Government Law, Immigration Law) A Colombian National's request for review BIA's denial of her applications for withholding of removal and related relief is denied as the IJ's adverse credibility determination is supported by specific and persuasive findings. Moreover, with the petitioner's testimony discredited, there is very little evidence in the record to support petitioner's asylum claim.

(U.S. 11th Cir., Administrative Law, Immigration Law) In a petition for review of the BIA's denial of petitioner's application for a waiver of inadmissibility, the petition is denied where, because petitioner's approved I-140 visa petition did not make him a lawful resident under section 212(h) when the Immigration and Naturalization Service formally approved his application for adjustment, petitioner did not lawfully reside continuously in the U.S. for the seven years preceding the initiation of his removal proceedings on October 25, 2003.