Tinoco-Aguilera

Tinoco-Aguilera v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Good Law
73 F. App'x 946
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 20, 2003No. 01-70671; INS Nos. A74-796-356, A74-796-357California1,314 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Martin Tinoco-Aguilera and Leticia Torres-Tinoco (“the Tinocos”) petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) that dismissed their pro se appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their motion to reopen to apply for suspension of deportation. The BIA determined that there was *947 no reason to disturb the IJ’s decision, as it found that the Tinocos had failed to comply with the procedural requirements of Matter of Lozada, 19 I & N Dec. 637 , 1988 WL 235454 (BIA 1988), and so could not demonstrate a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a), and we grant the petition and remand for further proceedings.

“Ineffective assistance of counsel in a deportation proceeding is a denial of due process under the Fifth Amendment if the proceeding was so fundamentally unfair that the alien was prevented from reasonably presenting his case.” Lopez v. INS, 775 F.2d 1015, 1017 (9th Cir.1985). To prevail under this standard, “the alien must show that counsel’s ineffective performance prejudiced her.” Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 899 (9th Cir.2003). Our cases reflect that…

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.