Martinez v. Attorney General
693 F.3d 408
| 3rd Cir. | 2012Background
- Martinez, a Nicaragua native, entered the U.S. without inspection in 1985 and later married a U.S. citizen.
- He applied to adjust status to lawful permanent resident (LPR) and was admitted as an LPR in March 1991 after pursuing an immigrant visa abroad.
- Two weeks after admission, Martinez was sentenced to four years in prison for a sexual offense involving his eight-year-old step-daughter.
- DHS initiated removal proceedings in 2009, conceding removability for an aggravated felony (sexual abuse of a minor).
- Martinez argued for relief under former INA § 212(c) or § 212(h), contending he was never lawfully admitted for permanent residence due to fraud.
- BIA and IJ held he was barred under § 212(h) because he had previously been admitted as an LPR and later convicted of an aggravated felony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether 'admission' for § 212(h) hinges on procedural regularity. | Martinez argues he was never lawfully admitted for permanent residence due to fraud. | Martinez was admitted; § 212(h) bars waivers for those admitted as LPR who commit an aggravated felony. | Admissible by procedure; bar applies. |
| Does § 212(h) apply to someone who obtained LPR status but was not substantively eligible? | Martinez contends substantive ineligibility should exempt him from the waiver bar. | Statute bars those previously admitted as LPR who commit an aggravated felony, regardless of substantive eligibility. | Substantive eligibility not required; bar applies. |
| Should Chevron deference apply to § 212(h) interpretation here? | Chevron deference should apply; BIA’s interpretation compelled by Congress. | Statutory language is unambiguous; deference not required. | Chevron deference not required; statute considered unambiguous. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hing Sum v. Mukasey, 602 F.3d 1092 (9th Cir. 2010) (defines § 212(h) as applying to post-admission aggravated felonies; emphasizes procedural admission.)
- Gallimore v. Att'y Gen., 619 F.3d 216 (3d Cir. 2010) (discusses 'lawfully admitted for permanent residence' in context of waivers.)
- Bracamontes v. Holder, 675 F.3d 380 (4th Cir. 2012) (limited deference to BIA on § 212(h); notes statutory ambiguity findings vary by circuit.)