Dec. 8, 2012
-- Attorney Tony E. Parada, an immigration lawyer in Houston, represented a client who had tried to get his deportation order cancelled before the request was denied by an immigration judge. The judge denied the cancellation request on March 3, 2011, though an alternative request for voluntary departure was granted, according to the U.S. Department of Justice’s Board of Immigration Appeals decision document. With Mr. Parada’s help, the client appealed decision made by the immigration judge and won (Case No. A xx-xxx-761; U.S. Department of Justice; Executive Office for Immigration Review; Board of Immigration Appeals; Falls Church, Va.). Mr. Parada, of the Law Office of Tony E. Parada, was able to help his client show that certain errors were made by the immigration judge, which ultimately led to a favorable outcome for his client.
Mr. Parada’s client was able to show that the judge had erred in his decision, which was given based on the argument that the immigrant did not properly meet the burden of proof that he had not been convicted of certain crimes that lead to deportation. According to the appeals document, the man had pleaded guilty on Oct. 20, 2009 to assault of a family member and was convicted of that crime (a class A misdemeanor)
. He was initially charged with felony assault of a family member by choking. Under federal law, individuals can be deported when they are convicted of “crimes involving moral turpitude,” also known as CIMT. Unlike aggravated assault, simple assault is generally not considered a CMIT. In order for the assault to fall under the CMIT category, certain factors would need to be present, such as the use of a deadly weapon or the cause of serious bodily injury against a victim who is seen as requiring a higher level of protection.
The Board of Immigration Appeals found that the immigration judge in this individual’s case had essentially concluded that the respondent’s offense involved moral turpitude, regardless of the fact that he had ultimately been convicted of a lesser offense (simple assault). According to the board’s statement in the appeals document, it was “improper”
for the immigration judge to rely on the complaint of the original charges rather than information regarding the actual conviction. The board also found that the mere fact that corporal abuse was inflicted on a family member was not sufficient evidence that the respondent actually committed a CMIT. As a result, the previous immigration court decision was remanded, overturning the previous judge’s decision.
Mr. Parada, who has handled hundreds of deportation-
related proceedings for clients in the past, was able to help this particular individual reach a positive result in his case. He is a skilled lawyer who knows how to handle a variety of immigration-
related cases, whether they involve deportation, cancellation of removal, citizenship, naturalization or other areas. To learn about the services that the Law Office of Tony E. Parada provides, visit http://www.tonyparadalaw.com