Calla-Collado v. Attorney General of the United States
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 23878
| 3rd Cir. | 2011Background
- Calla-Collado, a Peruvian native, entered the U.S. in 2005 and was later arrested for DUI while unlicensed.
- ICE detained him after police learned of his undocumented status; he was placed in removal proceedings under INA § 212(a)(6)(A).
- A prior IJ hearing in Louisiana in 2007 involved his admission to the NTA allegations; venue was later moved to New Jersey.
- Calla-Collado sought to withdraw pleadings and obtain an evidentiary hearing; the IJ did not rule on those motions, and he was ordered removed.
- BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision, finding no suppression, no improper transfer, and no suppression of alienage evidence under the Fourth Amendment.
- Calla-Collado petitioned for review; the court reviews BIA’s merits with deference to underlying IJ analysis where adopted.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance prejudice | Calla-Collado argues counsel conceded unlawfully without his consent. | DHS contends admission was binding and a tactical choice by counsel. | Admission binding; no prejudice shown. |
| Garda-Flores applicability to AG Directive 2007-3 | Directive violation should invalidate the proceedings under Garda-Flores. | Garda-Flores does not apply to a state directive; no prejudice shown. | Garda-Flores does not apply; no prejudice shown. |
| Transfer to Louisiana and constitutional rights | Transfer was arbitrary, harming counsel access and ability to present evidence. | DHS has authority to determine detention locations; rights to counsel and to present evidence are preserved. | Transfer did not violate constitutional rights. |
Key Cases Cited
- Velasquez v. INS, 19 I. & N. Dec. 377 (BIA 1986) (admissions may be binding as a tactical decision of counsel)
- Rranci v. Atty. Gen. of the U.S., 540 F.3d 165 (3d Cir. 2008) (prejudice required to show ineffective assistance)
- Fadiga v. Atty. Gen. of the U.S., 488 F.3d 142 (3d Cir. 2007) (reasonable likelihood standard for prejudice in ineffective assistance claims)
- Mahmood v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 248 (3d Cir. 2005) (outsized remand when outcome is clear as a matter of law)
- Chavarria v. Gonzalez, 446 F.3d 508 (3d Cir. 2006) (deference to BIA; standard of review on BIA factual findings)
- Kayembe v. Ashcroft, 334 F.3d 231 (3d Cir. 2003) (reasonableness of BIA determinations in immigration cases)
- In re Garda-Flores, 17 I. & N. Dec. 325 (BIA 1980) (invalidating deportation when immigration regulation violated and prejudiced interests)
- Gandarillas-Zambrana v. Bd. of Immigration Appeals, 44 F.3d 1251 (4th Cir. 1995) ( DHS transfer authority and right to counsel/presentation of evidence)