Safe Havens



 
 

§ 5.7 1. Non-Deportable Nationality

 
Skip to § 5.

For more text, click "Next Page>"

There are several nationalities whose members may not be deported or subjected to other adverse immigration consequences:

 

            (1)  United States Citizens, see § 4.5, supra;

            (2)  Nationals of the United States, see § 4.6, supra; and

            (3)  American Indians born in Canada, see § 4.7, supra.

 

The safest of safe havens is where the client is a member of one of these non-deportable nationalities.

 

            It is therefore very important to identify every member of these classes.  Carefully review the requirements for these non-deportable nationalities before the client interview.  See § § 4.5-4.7, supra.

 

Updates

 

Eleventh Circuit

AGGRAVATED FELONY " THEFT " SHOPLIFTING
Ramos v. U.S. Attorney General, ___ F.3d ___, 2013 WL 599552 (11th Cir. Feb. 19, 2013) (Georgia conviction of shoplifting, in violation of Georgia Code 16"8"14(a)(1) [theft has two alternative intent elements: the intent of appropriating merchandise to his own use without paying for the same or to deprive the owner of possession thereof or of the value thereof, in whole or in part ...], is not categorically an aggravated felony theft offense, for purposes of deportability, because it can be committed with mere intent to appropriate, which falls outside the generic definition of aggravated felony theft); following Jaggernauth v. U.S. Attorney General, 432 F.3d 1346 (11th Cir. 2005) (a theft statute that included two disjunctive intent requirements"an intent to deprive and an intent to appropriate"was divisible and did not categorically constitute an aggravated felony theft offense).
AGGRAVATED FELONY " THEFT OFFENSE " GENERIC DEFINITION
Ramos v. U.S. Attorney General, ___ F.3d ___, ___, 2013 WL 599552 (11th Cir. Feb. 19, 2013) (an aggravated felony theft offense, under INA 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G), is defined as: the taking of property ... with the criminal intent to deprive the owner of rights and benefits of ownership, even if such deprivation is less than total or permanent.); quoting Gonzales v. Duenas"Alvarez, 549 U.S. 183, 189, 127 S.Ct. 815, 819"20, 166 L.Ed.2d 683 (2007).

 

TRANSLATE