Ali v. U.S. Attorney General
643 F.3d 1324
11th Cir.2011Background
- Ali lied on a 1998 application for permanent residence about never being arrested; in fact he had a Georgia child-molestation conviction.
- Ali pleaded guilty in 1991 and was discharged under Georgia’s First Offender Act; he later had the molestation charges nolle prosse by the district attorney.
- Ali was removed in 2002 for an aggravated felony and faced additional charges for willful misrepresentation of a material fact.
- Ali’s second removal hearing included Ali’s admission that he lied on the application; the immigration judge denied relief and ordered removal.
- Ali sought discretionary relief under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(1)(H); Board remanded after pardon evidence, but later maintained removability under misrepresentation.
- Ali’s counsel conceded removability for the misrepresentation charge at the May 2008 hearing; Ali applied for relief but was ordered removed; Board denied for ineffective-assistance challenge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether counsel's concession of removability was ineffective assistance | Ali | Chea acted reasonably and strategically | Concession was reasonable strategy; no ineffective assistance |
| Whether there was prejudice from the alleged deficient performance | Ali | No likelihood that outcome would differ | No reasonable probability of a different outcome |
| Whether the Board properly treated the conceded misrepresentation given the pardon evidence | Ali | Pardon did not defeat the fraud charge | Board’s treatment supported a reasonable decision |
Key Cases Cited
- Mejia Rodriguez v. Reno, 178 F.3d 1139 (11th Cir. 1999) (ineffective assistance requires a showing of deficient performance and prejudice)
- Gbaya v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 342 F.3d 1219 (11th Cir. 2003) (abuse-of-discretion standard for motion to reopen)
- Adefemi v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1022 (11th Cir. 2004) (substantial evidence review and favorable view of agency decision)
- Diallo v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 596 F.3d 1329 (11th Cir. 2010) (substantial evidence standard; favorable view of agency proceedings)
- Chacku v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 555 F.3d 1281 (11th Cir. 2008) (motion to reopen as a vehicle for introducing new evidence)
- Dakane v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 399 F.3d 1269 (11th Cir. 2005) (prejudice standard for ineffective assistance in immigration proceedings)