Jose Didiel Munoz v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General

Good Law
191 A.L.R. Fed. 711·339 F.3d 950·2003 WL 21847760·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7063·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 16269
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 8, 200301-71146California3,943 words

Opinion

Opinion

Clifton, J.

Jose Didiel Munoz entered the United States unlawfully when he was one year old, brought by his mother from Guatemala. He has lived in this country ever since. Now he is 24, and he faces removal from the United States pursuant to an order by an immigration judge (“IJ”) finding him removable for entry without inspection. The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissed his appeal of that order, and now he petitions for review.

Munoz’s arguments may be sorted into three contentions. First, noting that he has lived in this country effectively his entire life, Munoz argues that removing him would violate due process. Second, he contends that he was prejudiced by ineffective assistance of counsel at the hearing before the IJ. Third, based on the proposition that children cannot properly fend for their legal rights, Munoz argues that we should equitably toll, or extend pursuant to international law obligations, certain filing deadlines for aliens who, like himself, were children at the time of the filing dates. He notes that had certain filings been made on his behalf some years ago, his status today might be very different, and further, that as a minor he was legally…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.