Julio Baltazar-Alcazar Maria Guadalupe Baltazar v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Good Law
386 F.3d 940·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 21858
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 21, 200402-73363California3,491 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKEOWN, J.

Julio Baltazar-Alcazar (“Mr. Baltazar”) and Maria Guadalupe, Baltazar (“Mrs. Bal-tazar”) petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) order denying their application for suspension of deportation. The issue before us is whether the Baltazars were denied the right to counsel when the immigration judge banned an entire law firm from representing them at their deportation hearing. We conclude that the Baltazars did not knowingly and voluntarily waive their statutory right to counsel of choice and that they were prejudiced by the denial of that right. We grant the petition for review.

I. Background

The background and sequence of the proceedings is important to our decision, so we recount the events in some detail. The Baltazars, both born in Mexico, entered the United States without inspection and have lived here since 1989. In late 1996, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (“INS”) commenced separate deportation proceedings against each of them. Judge Martin presided over Mr. Baltazar’s case, and Mrs. Baltazar’s case was assigned to Judge Latimore. In the preliminary stages of the proceedings, James Valinoti represented both of them. Each admitted the factual…

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.