Oladejo (not precedential): BIA Ignored Reasonable Explanation Why Motion To Reopen For Ineffective Assistance Was Late
Oladejo v. Holder
No. 08-3043
March 19, 2010
Not Precedential
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/083043np2.pdf
Judges Fuentes, Weis, and Garth. Per Curiam. Overturning the BIA. Originally before Immigration Judge Alberto J. Riefkohl, but the Third Circuit only criticized the BIA's ruling, not anything IJ Riefkohl ordered.
A man filed a motion with the BIA arguing that his original lawyer had given ineffective assistance of counsel. The BIA denied the motion by concluding that the man did not attribute the delay in filing the motion to any lawyer's ineffectiveness. However, Mr. Oladejo did argue that the reason he delayed filing his motion was because one of his former lawyer never explained to him the consequences of the BIA denying one of his earlier motions to reopen. One consequence was that his strategy of seeking legal status through adjustment of status was impossible after the BIA denied the earlier motion to reopen.
No. 08-3043
March 19, 2010
Not Precedential
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/083043np2.pdf
Judges Fuentes, Weis, and Garth. Per Curiam. Overturning the BIA. Originally before Immigration Judge Alberto J. Riefkohl, but the Third Circuit only criticized the BIA's ruling, not anything IJ Riefkohl ordered.
A man filed a motion with the BIA arguing that his original lawyer had given ineffective assistance of counsel. The BIA denied the motion by concluding that the man did not attribute the delay in filing the motion to any lawyer's ineffectiveness. However, Mr. Oladejo did argue that the reason he delayed filing his motion was because one of his former lawyer never explained to him the consequences of the BIA denying one of his earlier motions to reopen. One consequence was that his strategy of seeking legal status through adjustment of status was impossible after the BIA denied the earlier motion to reopen.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home