806 F.3d 671
1st Cir.2015Background
- ICE agents raided Michael Bianco, Inc. in New Bedford on March 6, 2007; Garcia was detained, handcuffed, photographed, transported to Fort Devens, and later to Bristol County Correctional Facility.
- At Fort Devens an ICE agent prepared an I-213 form stating Garcia was a Mexican citizen smuggled to the U.S.; Garcia later moved to suppress the I-213 and her birth certificate as fruits of alleged constitutional violations.
- Two days after the raid the Mexican Consul General faxed Garcia’s and her son’s Mexican birth certificates to ICE and asked ICE to consider releasing her so she could care for her child.
- On remand from the BIA, Garcia testified and invoked the Fifth Amendment when asked about alienage; the IJ admitted the birth certificate and found it independently established alienage.
- The BIA affirmed, concluding Garcia failed to show egregious constitutional violations and noting the birth certificate independently confirmed identity and alienage; Garcia petitioned for review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence obtained after alleged Fourth/Fifth Amendment violations must be suppressed in removal proceedings | Garcia: the I-213 and birth certificate were fruits of unconstitutional arrest/detention and should be suppressed | Govt: Garcia failed to show egregious violations; even if she did, the birth certificate was obtained independently | Court: Denied suppression of birth certificate; evidence independent or sufficiently attenuated from any illegality |
| Whether Lopez-Mendoza’s exclusionary-rule limitation can be overcome here | Garcia: alleged egregious misconduct triggers suppression despite Lopez-Mendoza | Govt: Lopez-Mendoza applies; suppression only for egregious violations and evidence obtained by exploitation of illegality | Court: Did not decide whether violations were egregious because birth certificate independently proved alienage |
| Whether the Mexican Consulate’s production of the birth certificate was tainted by the arrest | Garcia: Consulate would not have sent the certificate but for the arrest | Govt: Consulate acted independently; no evidence government exploited any illegality | Court: Consular production was voluntary and not tainted; mere but-for causation insufficient for suppression |
| Whether invoking Fifth Amendment precluded IJ from relying on the birth certificate | Garcia: silence should not allow adverse inference to bolster the certificate | Govt: IJ may draw adverse inference and credit independent documentary evidence | Court: IJ permissibly treated silence as corroboration; birth certificate alone sufficed to prove alienage |
Key Cases Cited
- I.N.S. v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (superseding exclusionary rule in routine civil deportation proceedings except for egregious violations)
- Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (evidence is not per se ‘‘fruit’’ of illegality merely because it would not have come to light but for that illegality)
- United States v. Crews, 445 U.S. 463 (attenuation and interruption of causal chain can purge taint of initial illegality)
- United States v. Ceccolini, 435 U.S. 268 (emphasizing voluntariness of third-party production and degree of free will)
- Soto-Hernandez v. Holder, 729 F.3d 1 (review standard for BIA legal conclusions)
- United States v. Finucan, 708 F.2d 838 (factors relevant when evidence obtained from third parties)
- Peña-Beltre v. Holder, 622 F.3d 57 (adverse inference from Fifth Amendment invocation in removal proceedings)