Ramos-Torres v. Holder
637 F.3d 544
5th Cir.2011Background
- Ramos-Torres, a Mexican citizen, illegally entered the U.S. in 1980 and was convicted in 1982 of unlawfully entering; he received three years’ unsupervised probation conditioned on not illegal returning to the U.S. and accepted an administrative voluntary departure to Mexico.
- He allegedly reentered illegally and later obtained lawful permanent resident (LPR) status in 1993 under the IRCA amnesty, despite the 1982 departure.
- In 2006, Ramos-Torres was convicted of illegally transporting aliens and faced removal; the IJ ruled he was ineligible for cancellation of removal because he could not have had eligible LPR status given the 1982 departure.
- The BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision; the court reviews final removal orders for questions of law or constitutional claims.
- The central issue is whether Ramos-Torres’s 1982 voluntary departure under threat of deportation interrupted continuous residence, thereby foreclosing LPR status and cancellation of removal.
- The ultimate holding is that the 1982 voluntary departure interrupted continuous residence and Ramos-Torres is ineligible for LPR status and for cancellation of removal, and the petition is denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does voluntary departure under threat of deportation interrupt continuous residence? | Ramos-Torres argued the voluntary departure is distinct from deportation and should not break residence. | The government argued voluntary departure under threat of deportation similarly interrupts presence and breaks continuous residence. | Yes; it interrupts continuous residence. |
| Is Ramos-Torres eligible for LPR status under IRCA based on continuous residence since 1982? | Ramos-Torres contends that the 1993 LPR status was valid despite a 1982 departure. | The interruption by voluntary departure prevents continuous residence necessary for LPR eligibility. | Ineligible for LPR under IRCA. |
| Can Ramos-Torres obtain cancellation of removal as an LPR after being found ineligible for LPR status? | If LPR status is invalid, cancellation should still be considered under INA § 240A. | Cancellation requires prior eligibility for LPR status, which he lacks. | Cancellation denied as a matter of law. |
| Is the court bound by the BIA and IJ determinations on whether the departure was 'under threat of deportation'? | Ramos-Torres argued the factual findings were not supported by the record. | The agency findings are not clearly erroneous and the issue is largely factual. | Review limited; factual findings affirmed; legal conclusions sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mireles-Valdez v. Ashcroft, 349 F.3d 213 (5th Cir. 2003) (administrative voluntary departure interrupts continuous presence)
- Vargas-Gonzalez v. I.N.S., 647 F.2d 457 (5th Cir. 1981) (departure under threat of deportation interrupts presence)
- Segura-Viachi v. I.N.S., 538 F.2d 91 (5th Cir. 1976) (departure impacts residence/presence considerations)
- Espinoza-Gutierrez v. Smith, 94 F.3d 1270 (9th Cir. 1996) (distinct absence analysis under different provision; travel not analogous)
- Pedroza-Padilla v. Gonzalez, 486 F.3d 1362 (9th Cir. 2007) (voluntary departure timing affected eligibility for legalization)
- I.N.S. v. Phinpathya, 464 U.S. 183 (1984) (continuous residence vs continuous presence principles)