Background

• Vanegas-Ramirez was arrested for removal in a raid that disclosed his Guatemalan citizenship.
• Venue change motion to New York was granted; he conceded removability in that motion.
• Suppression motion challenged the raid as egregiously unconstitutional and sought termination; asylum relief was also sought.
• IJ Morace denied both suppression and asylum; BIA affirmed.
• Court held that removability concessions are independently admissible evidence and denied the petition; asylum denial upheld for lack of well-founded fear.
• Proceedings and venue change occurred after an initial arrest and processing by ICE, with subsequent transfers to New York for removal proceedings.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Katris v. INS, 562 F.2d 866 (2d Cir. 1977) (independent evidence standard for removability despite unlawful arrest)
• Avila-Gallegos v. INS, 525 F.2d 666 (2d Cir. 1975) (deportation testimony admissible despite illegal entry)
• La Franca v. INS, 413 F.2d 686 (2d Cir. 1969) (admissions of removability not fruit of illegality)
• Lopez-Mendoza v. United States, 468 U.S. 1032 (U.S.) (exclusionary rule does not apply in civil removal; egregious violations may affect evidence later)
• Pretzantzin v. Holder, 736 F.3d 641 (2d Cir. 2013) (independent/attenuated evidence analysis after egregious raid; distinguishing from this case)
• Almeida-Amaral v. Gonzales, 461 F.3d 231 (2d Cir. 2006) (egregiousness standard interpreted; independent evidence intact)
• Chen v. BIA, 435 F.3d 141 (2d Cir. 2006) (standard of review and agency decision framework)
• Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471 (U.S.) (fruits of illegality discussion on independent source)
• New York v. Harris, 495 U.S. 14 (U.S.) (attenuation/independent source principle in suppression context)