Carrillo
Carrillo v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
After a removal hearing on December 6, 2001, an immigration judge denied applications for cancellation of removal submitted by petitioners Rosa Tamayo-Carrillo (“Ta-mayo”) and Jose De Jesus Lopez Solorzano (“Solorzano”), natives and citizens of Mexico. Tamayo and Solorzano unsuccessfully sought relief from this denial from the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) and now petition for review of three BIA decisions: (1) its affirmance without opinion of the immigration judge’s denial of their application for cancellation of removal; (2) its denial of their motion to reopen the immigration judge’s decision; and (3) its denial of their motion to reconsider its denial of their motion to reopen.
*701 1. The petition for review of the BIA’s affirmance of the immigration judge’s denial of the applications for cancellation of removal raises a single claim: that Tamayo and Solorzano received ineffective assistance of counsel from their former attorney, Marti Morales-Sproule (“Sproule”), in the proceeding before the immigration judge. However, the BIA must be given an opportunity to entertain an ineffective assistance of counsel claim in a motion to reopen before this court…