Supreme Court Hears Immigration Warnings Case

The United States Supreme Court has heard oral arguments on animmigration case that could have sweeping ramifications for thousands of criminal defendants.  In March of 2010 in Padilla v. Kentucky, theSupreme Court ruled that immigrants must be informed of theimmigration consequences of a plea of guilty to a criminal charge.  The question before the Supreme Court in this case is whether the rule inPadilla should be applied retroactively.  If the court does apply the Padilla rule retroactively, this would open the door to countless criminal defendants who were sentenced for a criminal conviction and had never been informed about the immigration consequences of a plea of guilty.  These defendants could come back to court and seek to have their criminal convictions set aside of the court applies the Padilla rule retroactively.  Since the Padilla decision in 2010 courts have been split on whether to apply the Padilla rule retroactively.  The current case involves Mexican citizen Roselva Chaidez  who applied for citizenship in 2009 and disclosed that she had been convicted for an insurance fraud scheme many years earlier.  Chaidez had a green card.  Once the conviction was disclosed the government sought to remove her from the country because of the criminal conviction. Chaidez argued that her lawyer never informed her of the immigration consequences of her guilty plea, thus constituting ineffective assistance of counsel.  In August of 2001 the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Chaidez by finding that since Padilla introduced a new constitutional requirement, based on Supreme Court precedent, the Padilla rule could not be applied retroactively.  In arguments before the United States Supreme Court, Chaidez's attorneys argue that Padilla merely confirmed a longstanding principle that criminal defendants have the right to a reasonably competent attorney.  The government argued that the 2010 Padilla decision announced a new rule.  Twenty-eight states joined the Federal Government fearing that if Chaidez prevails there will be a flood of old cases opened up seeking to throw out criminal convictions.

The case is Chaidez v. United States, No. - 11-820.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us atwww.legaldefenderspc.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295. 

Supreme Court Upholds Deportation for Filling False Tax Return

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that Immigrations and Customs Enforcement has the authority to label the crime of filing false tax returns, an "aggravated felony," subjecting lawful legal immigrants to automatic deportation.  The case involved Akio and Fukado Kawashima, a Japanese couple who came to the United States in 1984 with a goal of succeeding in business.  They opened up and operated a few popular sushi restaurants in California.  They never became U.S. citizens but were granted lawful permanent residence in the 1980's.  However, in 1991 they filed tax returns in which they underreported their income.  The federal government filed criminal charges against them and they plead guilty and paid $245,000 in penalties and interest.  They paid the entire amount in full and the husband ended up serving 4 months in a federal prison.  Ten years later, the Immigration and Naturalization Service decided to deport them.  In a 6 to 3 decision, the Supreme Court sided with Immigration and Naturalization and the Kawashima's have now been deported.  Tax lawyers point out that this ruling sends an ominous warning to legal immigrants.  If they are caught lying on their taxes, not only could they be forced to pay heavy monetary penalties, but they could also be deported.  This would apply to any false statement on a tax return made by a legal immigrant.  Immigration officials point to a 1994 provision created by Congress which defined "aggravated felony" to include "fraud" and "deceit" that cost the victims more than $200,000.  That threshold has since been lowered to $10,000.  It seems that deportation would apply to cases in which criminal charges were filed, not in cases involving only a civil penalty sought by the IRS.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.legaldefenderspc.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Cook County Board Revisiting Immigration Hold Requests

The Cook County Board has agreed to hold hearings to reconsider whether to continue to hold defendants that have immigration holds on them in Cook County Jail.  In September, 2010, Cook County Commissioners voted to stop honoring requests from federal Immigration officials to hold suspected illegal immigrants while the federal government checked on their immigration status.  One of the reasons given by Board members for voting to not honor the requests was because this policy was putting defendants charged with minor criminal offenses at risk of being deported.  I also suspect that another reason was that the cost of holding these suspected illegal immigrants in jail until immigration officials picked them up was too much for Cook County.  However, a few weeks ago a defendant was released from custody after he was charged with killing a pedestrian in the Logan Square neighborhood.  The Defendant has since fled and ICE had put an immigration hold on him.  This story has caused the Cook County Board to revisit this move and has now agreed to hold hearings.  Board members have requested imput from the Office of the Cook County State’s Attorney and from the Cook County Sheriff.  One of the Board members has introduced a measure that would reinstate the policy of complying with federal immigration holds but only in cases involving violence and drugs or if the defendant is listed in a federal terrorist watch list.  The President of the Cook County Board is seeking to expand the inquiry to include a thorough review of how bond is set for all criminal defendants, regardless of immigration status.  Both the Office of the Cook County State’s Attorney and the Cook County Sheriff indicated that they look forward to participate in any future hearings.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Washington D.C. Mayor Orders Police Not To Check Immigration Status of Suspects

The mayor of Washington, D.C., has signed an executive order which directs his police officers to not check the immigration status of suspects.  The only exception in the mayor's order is that police can check the immigration status of someone if their immigration status has something to do with the crime they are being investigated for.  The Mayor of the District of Columbia, Vincent Gray, is concerned that residents are unwilling to cooperate with police investigations if they fear that their immigration status will be questioned.  The mayor believes that their fear of cooperating with the police endangers the community and adversely impacts public safety.  The fact is that this has been the longstanding policy in the District of Columbia for a long time.  The mayor's signing of the order just makes it official.  By signing the order the mayor said he wants to make it clear that his city's police officers are not in the business of enforcing federal immigration laws.  This does not mean that the District of Columbia is going to opt out of the Department of Homeland Security's Secure Communities program which is expected to be in place nationally by 2013.  The Secure Communities program is designed to let local officials cooperate with the Department of Homeland Security and turn over individuals before they are released from prison to the Department of Homeland Security for deportation.

The issue of illegal immigrants still garners emotional responses from various groups.  But the fact is that illegal immigration is not the problem that it once was.  The number of illegal immigrants entering the United States is at the lowest it has been in 40 years.  Turns out that the lack of jobs has deterred illegal immigrants from coming to the United States.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Cook County Deals Blow to Feds

The Cook County Board has dealt a blow to the Federal Government when it comes to requests to detain people in Cook County jail who are facing misdemeanor charges.  The action by the Cook County Board follows a recent federal court case in which it was held that requests by the federal government to place immigration holds on defendants for possible deportation were merely requests and were not mandatory.  The Cook County Board pointed out that the cost to Cook County taxpayers is roughly $15 million per year, or roughly $143 per day per inmate to comply with these immigration hold requests by the federal government.  The decision only applies to individuals charged with misdemeanors who have immigration holds placed against them and are released from Cook County Jail for any reason.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

FBI Sting Leads To 678 Arrests Across The Nation

A three month investigation lead by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has lead to the arrests of 678 people with alleged ties to the Mexican drug cartels.  322 of the people arrested had violent criminal histories.  The operation targeted foreign nationals from international gangs that deal with identity theft, fraud, weapons trafficking and drug dealing.  ICE claims that members of these international gangs have committed robberies, murders, assaults and rapes.  164 people were arrested for non drug related violations and immigration violations.  Law enforcement officials seized 86 guns, eight pounds of methamphetamine, 30 pounds of marijuana, one pound of cocaine, $70,000 in cash and two vehicles.  The operation involved at least 173 law enforcement agencies.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Missouri High Court Sides With Illegal Immigrant In Adoption Case

The Missouri Supreme Court has ruled in favor of an illegal alien who had lost her child after she was jailed following an immigration raid.  The effect of the ruling is that the Missouri Supreme Court is holding that state adoption laws apply to illegal immigrants.  The mother, Encarnacion Bail Romero was arrested in an immigration sweep of a poultry plant and eventually sentenced to two years in Federal Prison for Aggravated Identity Theft.  Another couple was helping Romero's family take care of her son after his arrest.  The couple was contacted by another couple about adopting the child.  Their adoption was granted on the basis that Romero had abandoned her child.  Romero has been contesting the adoption since her release from prison in 2009.  The child was born in the United States and is a citizen.  The Missouri Supreme Court ruled that state adoption laws were not followed in this case when the mother's parental rights were terminated.  The Court ordered a trial regarding Romero's parental rights.

The case had generated a great deal of international interest.  The Guatemalan consulate and the ACLU had filed written briefs on the case and Guatemala's ambassador to the United States had watched the original arguments in November.  The court recognized that immigrants have the same parental rights as anyone else.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

1410 or 410 Probation - A Primer

As a continuing service to our readers, we are presenting our first  article in our "Primer" series

I frequently get calls from clients inquiring about different options for avoiding a felony conviction for a drug case.  An often misunderstood type of first time felony drug offender probation that allows defendants to avoid having a felony conviction is commonly known as 1410 or 410 Probation.  Here's how it works.  When you are sentenced to 1410 or 410 Probation, you plead guilty to the drug offense at the time of sentencing.  A Motion to Vacate your plea is entered and continued until the termination date.  Once you successfully complete your probation, your conviction is vacated, as if it never happened.  So, when someone runs your criminal record, it doesn't show a conviction.  However, a record of your arrest, and the court files and records will remain.  A background search will turn up those records and an employer may not hire you once they find out that you were once charged with a felony drug case.  The only way to remove the court records and the arrest record is to expunge or seal your records.  You can expunge the case 5 years after you complete your 1410 or 410 Probation.  The law does allow you to seal your case 4 years after completion of your 1410 or 410 probation.  However, expungement is much more thorough then sealing and sealing takes much longer than expungement so you are better off waiting for the expungement.  1410 or 410 Probation is a great alternative for first time drug offenders which allows them to avoid having a felony drug conviction on their record which will follow them around the rest of their lives.  Of course, in order to expunge or seal you must not catch any other cases after you completed your 1410 or 410 probation.

On a side note, 1410 or 410 probation may not preclude an alien from being deported by Immigration.  There is at least one case from this jurisdiction, Gill v. Ashcroft, 2003, which held that a sentence of 1410 or 410 probation is considered a conviction under immigration law.  Other jurisdictions have held differently and this issue may very well make its way to the United States Supreme Court.  But the point is that practitioners need to be aware of the potential immigration consequences of a sentence of 1410 or 410 probation.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Elgin Actively Helping ICE Find Illegal Immigrants

Elgin has made it clear that it wants to help U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents track down illegal aliens involved in criminal activity.  Last week the Elgin Police Department announced that they have become the first local police agency in the area to have one of its officers join a federal task force that tracks down foreign born gang members with questionable residency status.  This move is being done to strengthen Elgin's relationship with ICE.  Currently, all foreign born people arrested in Elgin have their identities checked through the Immigration Alien Query database to verify their immigration status.  ICE has a contract with the City of Elgin to house ICE detainees for up to 72 hours in Elgin jails.  This gives ICE an opportunity to investigate the immigration status of people arrested and place a detainer on them.  The officer joining the federal task force will help track down people released by mistake before ICE was able to place a detainer on them.  Back in June, Elgin Police announced that two detectives had been assigned to the Regional Document and Benefit Task Force which tracks down people who create fake and fraudulent documents.  ICE reports that they have arrested over 280 gang members in the region so far this year, and over 4,000 nationally.  ICE credits the cooperative efforts of local police agencies for the arrests.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Penn. Mayor Vows To Take Immigration Fight To Supreme Court

The mayor of Hazelton, Pennsylvania has vowed to take the striking down of his crackdown on illegal immigrants to the Supreme Court.  In 2006, Hazelton Pennsylvania passed an ordinance that assessed fines against landlords who rented to illegal immigrants, denied business permits to companies that gave jobs to illegal immigrants and required prospective tenants to register with the city and pay for a permit to rent in the city.  Last month, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia struck down the ordinance because it usurped the federal government's exclusive power to regulate immigration.  Appeals courts are split over whether a state or a municipality have the right to enforce laws dealing with immigration.  The United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear oral arguments over a 2007 Arizona law that prohibits employers from knowingly hiring illegal aliens.  Following the passing of the Hazelton Pennsylvania ordinance in 2006, dozens of towns throughout the country enacting similar measures.  

We have been reporting consistently on efforts to deport legal aliens who have been convicted of criminal offenses.  We will continue to report on the evolving issue of legal and illegal immigration and the impact it is having on our criminal courts and our clients facing criminal prosecution and possible deportation.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Supreme Court Rules On Aggravated Felony For Immigration Purposes

The United States Supreme Court today issued a ruling on a case involving what is considered an aggravated felony for immigration deportation purposes.  Jose Angel Carachuri-Rosendo was convicted in state court of simple drug possession of a single Xanax pill a year after he had received 20 days in jail for possessing 2 ounces of marijuana.  The state prosecutor had the option to charge him with an aggravated felony because if was his second case, but chose not to.  The federal government sought to have him removed from the country because he had committed an aggravated felony on the basis that it was his second conviction which amounted to a serious, or aggravated felony.  Carachuri-Rosendo argued that he had not been convicted of an aggravated felony.  The Supreme Court held that the immigration court cannot enhance the state judgment by substituting its judgment over that of the state court.  Since there was no finding of recidivism by the state court, the immigration court cannot add their judgment to that of the state court.

The impact of this decision is that a second conviction does not automatically make someone eligible for deportation.  The federal government had argued that since a second conviction for a minor drug offense would be considered an aggravated felony under federal law, immigrants convicted of a second minor drug offense in state court would be subject to automatic deportations.  That is no longer the case and thousands of immigrants who fall under the same set of facts can now petition the immigration judge for leniency.  Before this decision, deportation was automatic and they could not seek leniency.  Carachuri-Rosendo, who was well over 30 years old, has been in the United States legally since he was 5 years old.  His common law wife, mother, sister and 4 children are all U.S. citizens.  Carachuri-Rosendo had actually been deported to Mexico.

The case is Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 09-60.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

American Fragmentation

I noticed today in the Drudge Report the following articles:

- Texas lawmaker wants Arizona's immigration law for state...

- California lawmaker: Deport children of illegal aliens...

- This is Alabama; we speak English,' candidate says. . .

Basically, Texas is on its way to becoming a police state like Arizona. In California, Congressman Duncun wants to deport newborns of illegal aliens. In Alabama, gubernatorial candidate Tim James would change the law to administer the drivers' license exam only in English. Such a law would have prevented my father from obtaining his Driver's license in the 60s since he only spoke Greek. Eventually, like most immigrants, he learned English.

Amazingly, more than 90 congressional representatives are in support of federal legislation to eliminate automatic citizenship for children born on US soil to illegal aliens. As a society, if we agree to take the civil liberties from one ethnic group, we open the door for any ethnic group to be persecuted in the future. Today "they" start with the Latinos; what group will be next in line? Remember when we placed Japanese Americans in concentration camps during WWII?

So how does this relate to criminal law? In order for these types of policies to take effect, laws will be written with criminal and civil penalties. More criminal laws? I wonder what a 10 year old would be legally required to do if they found out that they were illegally in the US? Would the kid be required to surrender? Would the kid be a fugitive for continuing to hide? Are we going to have hideouts in the US for kids pursued by the immigration police?

The criminal courts is where much of the fight is going to take place. I am confident that our judicial system will defend the Constitution and protect our civil liberties.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Supreme Court Rules Courts Can Review Motions To Reopen Immigration Cases

Today the United States Supreme Court issued a ruling in an immigration case that may open the doors to courthouses for countless immigrants slated for deportation.  The ruling gives federal courts jurisdiction to hear decisions on motions to reopen decisions by the Board of Immigration Appeals.  The federal regulation gives discretion to the Attorney General and does not allow any review of his final decision.  However, the Supreme Court, relying on the longstanding tradition of judicial review of administrative action and an unwillingness to exempt judicial review of administrative decisions unless the statute clearly provides for it.  In this case the court found that such a prohibition does not exist in the legislation. 

The case involved an Albanian citizen who came to the United States in 1995 on a work visa.  The visa expired and he continued to remain in the United States.  In 1996 he applied for political asylum claiming he would be persecuted for his political beliefs if he returned to Albania.  He failed to appear for his asylum hearing and he was ordered to be deported.  He filed Motions to Reopen his case but the motions were denied by the Attorney General and the Board of Immigration Appeals.

An interesting twist to the case is that the government agreed with the petitioner that the federal court should have jurisdiction to hear the denial of his Motion to Reopen his case.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Cover Up Of Immigration Deaths In Jail Exposed

Last week, the New York Times published an article about a vast government cover up of men and women who die in our nation's immigration jails.  Since October of 2003, 107 immigrants have died while being held in jails by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.  The New York Times and the American Civil Liberties Union made a request under the Freedom of Information Act in which they received thousands of pages of documents which detail the lengths to which government officials went to try to keep the deaths under wraps.  They uncovered damaging confidential reports, confidential memos and Blackberry memos which are very damaging.  They have uncovered evidence that officials intentionally lied and did everything they could to cover up mistreatment of inmates.  They even uncovered falsified medical logs.  One case showed that an inmate who died had been given Motrin.  Problem is that when the drug was supposedly given, the inmate had already died.

The Obama administration has vowed to overhaul the immigration system.  However, critics complain that the system will not change as long as the immigration system has no oversight from outside agencies.  The immigration officials will be in charge of policing themselves.

To read the entire article, please click here.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Supreme Court To Hear Important Immigration Case

The United States Supreme Court has agreed to hear an immigration case which could affect whether immigrants can be deported for minor misdemeanor convictions.  The case involves Jose Angel Carachuri-Rosendo, who was deported to Mexico after he plead no contest to possession of Xanax without a prescription.  A year earlier he plead guilty to possession of less than 2 ounces of marijuana.  The federal government began deportation proceedings against Rosendo because under federal law, the second conviction made it a serious crime.  Rosendo lived in the United States as a legal resident with a fiance and four children, all of which are U.S. Citizens.  Under Texas law, both crimes were misdemeanors.  Rosendo was eventually deported.

The United States Supreme Court agreed to hear the matter after the Obama Administration backed Rosendo's request for Supreme Court review.  Review was requested because courts have been split on the issue of whether conviction of minor drug possession charges should be grounds for deportation.  The Supreme Court's decision could affect countless immigrant deportation cases.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.

Overhaul In Immigrant Detention Announced

Today, the Department of Homeland Security announced sweeping changes in the way that illegal immigrants are detained. The system houses an average of 32,000 detainees throughout the United States every day. The current system has been criticized for being cruel and inhumane. Currently, detainees are held in prison like facilities which are costly. The department announced that they will be coming up with new ways to detain nonviolent immigrants. Two new facilities will be built that will probably house the more violent immigrants. A facility in Texas will be converted to only hold women. The department plans on developing a system to electronically monitor immigrants and house them in converted hotels. The 350 contracts to state, county and municipal prisons will be reviewed and controlled by a centralized office. There's also plans to set up an online system to allow families to check on the status of their loved ones. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has a $2.5 billion budget to deal with the detention and deportation of illegal immigrants. Current detention procedures cost up to $100 per day per inmate. Some of the alternatives announced by the department may cost as little as $14 a day. The goal is to place inmates in appropriate places until they are deported. For instance, a nonviolent immigrant should not be treated the same way as a violent immigrant.

In researching to post this blog, I was surprised by the different headlines from different newspapers. For instance, the Christian Science Monitor headline read, "Some Illegal Immigrants to be Held in Old Hotels, Nursing Homes." The Houston Chronicle headline read, "More Detained Immigrants May Be Released." One New York Times article read, "Salvaging Immigration Detention." All of these articles were about the same story. Illegal immigration is a volatile and emotional issue. It's interesting how the views of a particular author or newspaper editor come out in the headlines. One article suggests we are salvaging immigration detention and the other starts off by saying that more illegal immigrants may be released.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us at 1-800-228-7295.

ICE Drops Quotas But Arrests To Continue

The head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has ended arrest quotas in the fugitive operations program. In 2003, ICE agents were deployed around the country to arrest immigrants who had deportation orders pending and immigrants with criminal records. Many thousands of immigrants were arrested in the early morning hours when immigration agents would show up at their homes and arrest them. A review of this program showed that roughly 73 percent of immigrants arrested between 2003 and 2008 did not have criminal records. In 2006 ICE stopped requiring that two-thirds of those arrested be fugitives and added non fugitives as targets of arrest. On Monday, John Morton, the head of ICE, announced that the agency would no longer have any quotas or hard number and would just continue arresting individuals who had fought their cases in court and lost. Even though noncriminal fugitives are not out of the woods. Morton indicated that the agency will focus its attention on immigrants with criminal records.

For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.