ferino sanchez seltik, a094 216 526 (bia jan. 14, 2013)

7/29/2019 Ferino Sanchez Seltik, A094 216 526 (BIA Jan. 14, 2013)

1/7

Sweeney, Maureen A., EsquireUniversity of Maryland Immigration Clinic500 W. Baltimore Street, Suite 360Baltimore, MD 21201

Name: SELTIK, FERINO SANCHEZRiders:094-216-523

U.S. Department of JusticeExecutive Office for Immigration ReviewBoard of mmigration AppealsOffice of he Clerk5107 Leesbr1rg Pike, Suite 2000Falls Church, Vtrginitr 22041

DHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel BAL31 Hopkins Plaza, Room 1600Baltimore, MD 21201

A 094-216-526

Date of this notice: 1/24/2013

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.

EnclosurePanel Members:Guendelsberger, JohnAdkins-Blanch, Charles K.Manuel, Elise L.

Sincerely,DorutL c 1AAJ

Donna CarrChief Clerk

TranCUserteam: Docket

Cite as: Ferino Sanchez Seltik, A094 216 526 (BIA Jan. 14, 2013)


2/7

U.S. D e p a ~ m e n t of JusticeExecutive Office for l!llllligration Review Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

Files: A094 216 526- Baltimore, MDA094 216 523In re: FERINO SANCHEZ SELTIK

Date:

TENORIO DAVILA JUVENTINO a.k.a. Tenorio Cuban DavilaIN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGSAPPEALON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS: Maureen A. Sweeney, EsquireON BEHALF OF DHS:

APPLICATION: Termination

Jennifer PiateskiAssistant Chief Counsel

JAN J4ZD13

The respondents have appealed from the Immigration Judge's decision dated February 17,2011. The Intmigration Judge denied the respondents' motion to suppress on January 3, 2011,and granted the respondents' application for voluntary departure under section 240B(b) of theImmigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1229c(b), on February 17, 2011. On appeal, therespondents argue that the Immigration Judge erred in denying their motion to suppress. Therespondents' appeal will be sustained and the record will be remanded to the Immigration Judgefor further proceedings.

The Board reviews an Immigration Judge's findings of fact, including findings as to thecredibility oftestin10ny, under the "clearly erroneous" standard. 8 C.F.R. !003.1(d)(3)(i). TheBoard reviews questions of law, discretion, and judgment and all other issues in appeals fromdecisions oflmmigration Judges de novo. 8 C.F.R. 1003.l(d)(3)(ii).Upon de novo review, we find it appropriate to remand the record to the Immigration Judgefor further proceedings regarding the respondents' motion to suppress. The Intmigration Judgestated in his January 3, 20 II, decision that the exclusionary rule is not applicable in removalproceedings citing to INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984). In INS v. Lopez-Mendoza,

supra at I 050-51, the Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment exclusionary rule isgenerally inapplicable to deportation proceedings; however, a plurality suggested that this rulemay be applied in civil removal proceedings if there are egregious Fourth Amendment violationsthat transgress Fifth Amendment notions of fundamental fairness. The Board recognized thesame exception in Matter ofToro, 17 I&N Dec. 340, 343 (BIA 1980). In light of the foregoing,we find it appropriate to remand the record to the Immigration Judge to determine whether theFourth Amendment violations alleged by the respondents in their motion to suppress, if true, areso egregious that they would transgress due process protections afforded under the FifthAmendment. Accordingly, the following order will be entered.



3/7

A094 216 526 et al.

ORDER: The respondents' appeal is sustained and the record is remanded to theImmigration Judge for fi.uther proceedings consistent with the foregoing decision.

2



4/7

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICEEXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW

UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURTBalt imore, MarylandFi le Nos. : A 094 216 526

A 094 216 523

In th e Mat te r ofFERINO SANCHEZ SELTIKTENORIO CUBAN DAVILA

Respondents

February 17, 2011

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

CHARGE: Viola t ion of Sect ion 212 (a) (6) (I ) of th eImmigrat ion and Nat iona l i ty Act .

APPLICATION: Appl ica t ion fo r pos t hear ing volun tary depar tu re .

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF DHS:Rebecca Peters Jenn i fe r E. Pia t e sk i

ORAL DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGEThe responden ts a re c i t i z e ns and na t iona l s o f Mexico who

were placed in removal proceedings when Not ices to Appear weref i l e d with th e Immigra t ion Cour t .

The respondents appeared a t a Master Calendar and denied thea l lega t ions and denied th e grounds of removab i l i ty .

The responden t s ' counsel f i l e d a motion to suppress . TheGovernment responded to the motion and th e Court has consideredth e evidence f i l ed by th e pa r t i e s , as wel l as th e br i e f s , and has

1


5/7

denied th e motion to suppress .The responden t s ' counse l indica ted t h a t th e respondents

q u a l i f i ed fo r volun tary depar tu re , p o s t hear ing , and s t a t ed inher place t h a t the responden ts had not been gran ted vo lun tarydepar tu re in th e p as t and t h a t they had never been a r r e s t edexcept fo r Immigra t ion purposes and t h a t if gran ted vo lun tarydepar tu re , they would depar t within th e per iod o f t ime before th eexp i ra t ion of the vo lun ta ry depar tu re and pay t h e i r own way backto t h e i r home count ry o f Mexico.

Accordingly , it appearing t h a t th e respondents a re not ana t iona l s ecu r i t y t h r e a t nor a re they aggravated fe lons and beingotherwise e l ig ib l e fo r volun tary d ep a r t u re , th e Court w i l l gran tp o s t hear ing volun tary depar tu re fo r a per iod o f 60 days , whichwould exp i re on Apri l 18, 2011, or 60 days a f t e r any dec i s ion byan Appel la te Cour t . The Court w i l l requ i re t h a t a $500 depar tu rebond be pos ted fo r each person with in f ive days o f t h i s hear ing .I f th e re spondent s f a i l to depar t on o r before the exp i ra t ion o ft h e i r date o f volun tary depar tu re , then an automat ic o rd e r o fremoval w i l l go in to e f f e c t and th e re spondent s w i l l be orde redremoved from th e Uni ted Sta tes to Mexico.

ORDERSThe Court hereby f inds t h a t th e Government has shown by

c l e a r and convincing evidence t h a t th e respondents a re removablefrom th e Uni ted Sta tes in i t s charge and, t he re fo re , f ind themremovable.A 094 216 526/523 2 February 17, 2011


6/7

The Court fu r t h e r orders t h a t th e respondents be gran tedp o s t hear ing volun tary departure fo r a period of 60 days u n t i lA p r i l 18, 2011, and t ha t they pos t a departure bond of $500within f ive days of t h i s hear ing . I f the respondents do no tdepa r t by th e exp i ra t ion of the per iod o f vo lun ta ry depar tu re ,then the responden ts w i l l be ordered removed from th e UnitedS ta t e s to Mexico au tomat ica l ly .

A 094 216 526/523 3 February 17, 2011


7/7

CERTIFICATE PAGE

I hereby ce r t i fy t h a t the a t tached proceeding beforeJUDGE DAVID W. CROSLAND, in the mat te rs o f:

FERINO SANCHEZ SELTIKTENORIO CUBAN DAVILAA 094 216 526A 094 21 6 523

Bal t imore , Marylandi s an accura te , verbat im t r ansc r ip t of the recording as provided byth e Execut ive Off ice fo r Immigration Review and t h a t t h i s i s th eo r ig in a l t r a n s c r i p t t he reof fo r the f i l e o f th e Executive Off icefo r Immigrat ion Review.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n LKris ten J . Be tti,Free Sta t e Re o r t i n g , Inc .Apri l 8, 2011(completion date)

By submission of t h i s CERTIFICATE PAGE, the Cont rac to r c e r t i f i e st h a t a Sony BEC/T-147, 4-9hannel t r ansc r ibe r or equ iva len t , and/orCD, as descr ibed in Sect ion C, paragraph C.3 .3 .2 of th e con t rac t ,was used to t r ansc r ibe the Record of Proceeding shown in the aboveparagra! lh

ferino sanchez seltik, a094 216 526 (bia jan. 14, 2013)

Documents