Wednesday, June 02, 2010

Perez Muniz (not precedential): Unobjected Adherence To Case Completion Goals Difficult To Win On Appeal

Perez Muniz v. Holder
No. 08-1444
February 8, 2010
Not Precedential

Judges Rendell, Jordan, and Senior District Judge Padova. Opinion by Judge Jordan.

Francis X. Geier (argued) with Anayancy R. Houseman of Elizabeth, NJ, for Mr. Perez Muniz. Sharon Clay (argued) with Gregory G. Katsas, Richard M. Evans, and Brooke M. Maurer of OIL, Justice Department.

Upholding the BIA and IJ Annie S. Garcy.

In May 2006, IJ Garcy allowed Mr. Perez Muniz to reinstate his asylum application but only gave two weeks until the merits hearing, noting a desire to meet case completion guidelines. The Third Circuit focused on how Mr. Perez Muniz's lawyer had no objection to the short two week time period before the merits hearing and how IJ Garcy said that her desire to provide a fair hearing was more important than her desire to aide by case completion guidelines.

One point is that you need to object to an IJ's desire to adhere to case completion goals, even if does not seem very diplomatic to do so. Another point is that you should not assume that the Third Circuit will be sensitive to the pressures when an IJ notes case completion guidelines. Instead, object and make the record clear for the Third Circuit.


Post a Comment

<< Home