Washington, DC
Immigration Lawyer at Washington, DC
Practice Areas: Immigration
OUTCOME:
Held: Noncitizen's conviction for embezzlement by bank employee in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 656 does not qualify as an aggravated felony "offense involving fraud or deceit" under INA § 101(a)(43)(M)(I ... ). Order of removal vacated, removal proceedings terminated.
OUTCOME:
APA complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction challenging USCIS denial of O-1B extraordinary ability visa to acclaimed thoroughbred horse trainer.
OUTCOME:
Held: District Court denial of writ of error coram nobis reversed, Appellant granted coram nobis relief and conviction vacated. Successfully challenged district court's ruling that a trial court's ge ... neral warning during Rule 11 plea hearing concerning potential immigration consequences was sufficient to cure the prejudice caused by attorney's affirmative misadvice under "prong two" of the test articulated in Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 688 (1984).
OUTCOME:
Appeal of district court decision dismissing complaint under doctrine of consular nonreviewability. Underlying challenge to denial of immigrant visa petition by U.S. Consulate under INA §212(a)(3)(E)( ... iii)(II) for alleged participation in extrajudicial killings. Dismissed following Supreme Court opinion in Kerry v. Din, 135 S. Ct. 2128 (2015).
OUTCOME:
DHS appeal dismissed; successfully argued that client's Virginia conviction for attempted sexual battery not an aggravated felony under categorical approach.
OUTCOME:
Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis seeking to reopen criminal proceedings and vacate past conviction owing to ineffective assistance of counsel and fundamental errors that rendered defendant's guil ... ty plea not knowing intentional, and voluntary.
OUTCOME:
is retroactively applicable to ineffective assistance of counsel claims raised in collateral review. Whether Virginia fails to provide the constitutionally required adequate post-conviction remedy whe ... re, through a combination of strict time limits on collateral review and in-custody requirements, Petitioner and others similarly situated are precluded from vindicating violations of the right to effective assistance of counsel under Padilla.
OUTCOME:
Cancellation of removal under INA §240A(a) granted, removal proceedings terminated. Client granted relief despite series of criminal offenses over 3-year period.
OUTCOME:
Removal proceedings terminated; successfully argued that client's Virginia conviction for assault and battery neither a crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT) nor a domestic violence offense.
OUTCOME: Granted
Asylum granted to Nepali teacher based on well-founded fear of persecution by Maoist rebels.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
