Alvarez-Maldonado

Alvarez-Maldonado v. Ashcroft

Good Law
114 F. App'x 833
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 1, 2004No. 03-71105California231 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Petitioner Maricruz AIvarez-Maldonado seeks review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) declining to reopen her application for cancellation of removal. We grant the petition for review, and remand to the BIA.

We conclude that the deficient performance of Alvarez-Maldonado’s former attorney was prejudicial. Although counsel agreed to “produce and file an appeal brief’ and to “keep Ms. Alvarez informed at all stages of the proceedings,” he failed to fulfill both obligations. These omissions prevented Alvarez-Maldonado from raising Be ltram-Tirado v. INS, 213 F.3d 1179 (9th Cir.2000), before the BIA and this court as relevant precedent providing “plausible grounds for relief.” Dearinger ex rel. Volkova v. Reno, 232 F.3d 1042, 1046 (9th Cir.2000) (quoting United States v. Jimenez-Marmolejo, 104 F.3d 1083, 1086 (9th Cir.1996)) (internal quotation marks omitted). Under these circumstances, the BIA erred in denying Alvarez-Maldonado’s motion to reopen 1 for lack of prejudice. We accordingly remand to the BIA for further consideration.

PETITION GRANTED; REMANDED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the…

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.