Hernandez-Mancilla v. Holder
633 F.3d 1182
9th Cir.2011Background
- Petitioners Hernandez-Mancilla and Sierra-Guzman, Mexican nationals, entered the U.S. illegally in 1991.
- They paid a facilitator (CB Immigration Services) about $5,500 for immigration help, including asylum applications.
- CB advised they were eligible for lawful permanent residence, triggering removal proceedings.
- They received a notice to appear around May 2001; an IJ denied cancellation for lack of 10-year continuous presence.
- BIA affirmed; petitioners argued equitable tolling and equal protection; court affirmed the BIA.”
- The court applied de novo review to legal questions and deferential review to BIA factual findings, under standard immigration review.”
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether equitable tolling applies to the ten-year requirement | Hernandez-Mancilla argues CB's fraud tolls the period | Holder argues no equitable tolling under Lara-Torres | No equitable tolling |
| Whether equal protection is violated by the ten-year rule as applied | Petitioners are disadvantaged by the categorization | Statute rationally classifies based on total vs. continuous presence | Rational basis review sustains the distinction |
| Whether Lara-Torres governs equitable tolling in this context | Lara-Torres supports tolling due to attorney's misleading advice | Lara-Torres does not support tolling based on external misconduct | Lara-Torres does not permit equitable tolling here |
Key Cases Cited
- Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 968 (9th Cir. 2004) (removal proceedings not constitutional unfairness based on attorney advice; equita ble tolling denied)
- Lara-Torres v. Ashcroft, 404 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2005) (amendment; reiterates no tolling for external unfairness)
- Tawadrus v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir. 2004) (deference to factual findings; standard of review)
- De Martinez v. Ashcroft, 374 F.3d 759 (9th Cir. 2004) (legal questions de novo; equal protection review)
- Almaghzar v. Gonzales, 457 F.3d 915 (9th Cir. 2006) (immigration law interpretation given deference)
- Romero-Ruiz v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2008) (standard for reviewing BIA decisions vs IJ findings)