Skip to main content
Brian David Lerner

Brian Lerner’s Legal Cases

192 total


  • Grava v. INS

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Oct 02, 2000
    Outcome:
    Granted
    Description:
    Case involved asylum which was denied all the way to the 9th Circuit. However, the 9th agreed that this was similiar to a 'whistleblower', but that he had suffered persecution. Reversed and granted.
  • People vs. Hassan

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Oct 01, 2008
    Outcome:
    reversed
    Description:
    From the decision: Ahmed Ali Hassan, also know as Ahmed Aly Abdel Azim Hassan, Ahmed Ali Abdel-Azim Ibrahim Hassan, Ahmed Aly and Ahmed Aly Hassan Abdel Azim, appeals from the judgment fn. 1 entered upon his convictions in a court trial of offering a false or forged instrument for recording (Pen. Code, § 115, subd. (a), count 1) fn. 2 and offering false evidence (§ 132, count 2). The trial court sentenced him to the middle term of two years on count 1, staying execution of sentence and placing him on three years' probation on condition he serve one year in county jail. On count 2, it suspended imposition of sentence and placed him on three years' probation. Appellant contends that there is insufficient evidence (1) he violated section 115, and (2) he violated section 132. We reverse the conviction of count 2 and otherwise affirm. Appellant contends that his conviction of offering false evidence is unsupported by the evidence and contrary to law. He argues that there is no evidence that his marriage contract was forged, fraudulently altered or antedated because he had entered an Islamic {Slip Opn. Page 12} marriage. With respect to the "I-94" and "I -20" forms, while he does not contend that they are authentic, he claims that there was no evidence he knew they were forged or fraudulently altered. Appellant further contends that in any event, providing these documents to federal immigration investigators is not a "trial, proceeding, inquiry, or investigation whatever" because it is unclear whether those terms apply to state or local proceedings or whether they also apply to federal proceedings. We agree with appellant's contention that section 132 is inapplicable to the federal proceeding here. We therefore need not consider his first contention.
  • Ong vs. Holder

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Dec 08, 2009
    Outcome:
    Granted in part; dismissed in part
    Description:
    From the case itself: "The IJ’s reasoning that he lacked authority was contrary to law and therefore an abuse of discretion. See Singh v. INS, 213 F.3d 1050, 1052 (9th Cir. 2000) (the agency abuses its discretion when it acts “arbitrarily, irrationally, or contrary to the law”) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted); see also Ahmed, 569 F.3d at 1015 (IJ abused discretion by denying motion for second continuance to await adjudication of petitioner’s pending [AAU] appeal of denial of I-140 petition). Moreover, the IJ further abused his discretion because he did not explain his reasoning for the denial. See Arrozal v. INS, 159 F.3d 429, 432 (9th Cir. 1998) (failing to state its reasons and show proper consideration of all factors when weighing equities and denying relief is an abuse of discretion) (internal quotation marks and emphasis omitted). We therefore grant the petition for review as to this claim. "
  • McKenzie vs. Holder

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Dec 15, 2010
    Outcome:
    5th Circuit Granted and Remanded
    Description:
    Person from Jamaica with aggravated felony drug charge.
  • In Re: LUNA

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Outcome:
    Grant
    Description:
    Cancellation of Removal Granted
  • In Re: Duran

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Outcome:
    Granted
    Description:
    Convention Against Torture through Removal Proceedings
  • In Re: Patel

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Outcome:
    Granted
    Description:
    Court Removal Hearing for client with various fraud and entry charges. Applied for Adjustment of Status
  • State of California vs. Phillips

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Outcome:
    Granted
    Description:
    Criminal Case to vacate the criminal conviction so client can proceed with immigration case.
  • In Re: Supersaud

    Practice Area:
    Immigration
    Date:
    Jun 10, 2010
    Outcome:
    Granted
    Description:
    Deportation order previously issued. Filed a Motion to Reopen the in absentia hearing.
  • In Re: Boongaling

    Practice Area:
    Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
    Date:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Outcome:
    Discharged Granted
    Description:
    Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Petition