Juan Martinez Carcamo v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.
713 F.3d 916
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- ICE conducted a warrantless, allegedly nonconsensual entry into a trailer in Shakopee, Minnesota, at ~6:00 a.m., arresting Martinez and Garcia’s co-occupants.
- An IJ denied suppression of the passport evidence; the IJ conflated Martinez’s testimony with his son Jorge’s testimony.
- The Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed the appeal, repeating the IJ’s factual error and upholding removals.
- The government’s justification for the warrantless entry rested on alleged exigent circumstances arising from Jorge’s yell warning Garcia not to open the door.
- Martinez and Garcia presented no evidence of lawful entry; I-213 forms listed both as non-citizens, with no testimony confirming consent to entry by Garcia.
- The IJ and Board relied on alienage findings and evidence in the I-213s to order removal, while mischaracterizing key testimonies.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Fourth Amendment exclusion applies in removal proceedings. | Martinez/Garcia: egregious conduct warrants suppression. | ICE conduct not egregious; exclusion not required. | No suppression required; no egregious violation. |
| Whether the Board or IJ erred in due-process review due to misstatements of testimony. | Board/ IJ errors prejudiced proceedings. | Errors were non-prejudicial or not controlling. | Errors not prejudicial; due-process not violated enough to remand. |
| Whether the petition properly raised burden-shifting as a due-process issue and exhausted administrative remedies. | IJ should have shifted burden to government per older Board decisions. | Issue not properly exhausted; Board did not address it. | Lacks jurisdiction to reach burden-shifting issue; denied on that basis. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lopez-Mendoza v. INS, 468 U.S. 1032 (Supreme Court 1984) (egregious Fourth Amendment violations in removal context)
- Puc-Ruiz v. Holder, 629 F.3d 771 (8th Cir. 2010) (egregiousness standard in exclusionary rule in removal)
- Garcia-Torres v. Holder, 660 F.3d 333 (8th Cir. 2011) (rejects one-size-fits-all bad-faith approach to egregiousness)
- Lopez-Gabriel v. Holder, 653 F.3d 683 (8th Cir. 2011) (affirms totality-of-the-circumstances approach to egregiousness)
- United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (Supreme Court 1990) ( Fourth Amendment reach beyond the United States)