The Eighth Circuit has affirmed a finding that an asylum applicant who transported guns and drugs for MS-13 committed a serious non-political crime.
The full text of Herrera-Eias v. Garland can be found here:
Viewing entries tagged
serious nonpolitical crime
The Ninth Circuit has rejected an Interpol Red Notice as sufficient evidence to demonstrate a reason to believe the petitioner had committed a serious nonpolitical crime. The court noted that the notice alleged the petitioner participated in a crime at a time when the Immigration Judge found he was already in the United States, the underlying arrest warrant was not filed by the Department of Homeland Security, and the notice lacked sufficient details about the alleged crime.
The full text of Gonzalez Castillo v. Garland can be found here:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/08/31/21-70112.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has determined that an Interpol Red Notice, a Salvadoran arrest warrant, and the petitioner’s incredible testimony were sufficient to demonstrate serious reasons to believe that he had committed a serious nonpolitical crime.
The full text of Villalobos Sura v. Garland can be found here:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2021/08/17/20-71839.pdf
The Eighth Circuit has reversed a finding that there is a serious reason to believe that a petitioner committed a serious nonpolitical crime outside the United States. In so doing, the court concluded that the “serious reasons for believing” standard requires a finding of probable cause before an alien can be subject to the mandatory bar.
“The statutory framework and relevant case law direct us to require something more than “some evidence” in order to meet the probable cause standard in cases involving “serious reasons for believing” that a serious nonpolitical crime was committed. The parties did not cite, and we could not find, a case in which a court has found a Red Notice, alone, is sufficient to meet this standard. Also complicating the analysis in this case is whether or not the charges giving rise to the Red Notice had been dismissed. Barahona submitted evidence that the charges had been dismissed. DHS did not refute and did not ask for additional time to resolve whether this was accurate. The BIA erred in this case when it failed to make a probable cause finding, particularly in light of the dispute regarding the underlying criminal charges that gave rise to the Red Notice.”
The full text of Barahona v. Wilkinson can be found here:
https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/21/02/201546P.pdf
An amended version of the opinion can be found here:
The BIA has indicated that an Interpol Red Notice is sufficient evidence to indicate that a respondent may have committed a serious nonpolitical crime. In the instant case, DHS submitted an Interpol Red Notice reflecting that a warrant had been issued by the Magistrates Court of San Salvador, for the respondent’s arrest regarding a violation of article 345 of the Salvadoran Penal Code, which proscribes participation in an “illicit organization.” The notice further alleged that the respondent was a hitman for a gang. The BIA concluded that the notice was sufficient to shift the burden to the respondent to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the serious nonpolitical crime bar does not apply—in other words, to show that there are not serious reasons for believing that he committed a serious nonpolitical crime.
The full text of Matter of W-E-R-B- can be found here:
https://www.justice.gov/eoir/page/file/1256481/download
The Ninth Circuit has determined that a Chinese national involved in a scheme to embezzle public funds had committed a serious nonpolitical crime. “A large financial crime in the nature of theft, such as embezzlement, is normally a serious nonpolitical crime. To rebut this presumption, the applicant must ‘identify . . . facts showing that his offense had some ‘political aspect’ or ‘political objective.’” The court found that even if the prosecution of this crime was politically motivated, the crime itself was motivated solely by economic greed, and had no political angle to it. However, the court remanded for further consideration of the petitioner’s Convention Against Torture claim, finding that evidence suggests that Christians face torture in China.
The full text of Guan v. Barr can be found here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2019/05/30/17-71966.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has determined that there is sufficient reason to believe that a former professional soccer player committed a serious nonpolitical crime. Specifically, the court found that an indictment alleging that the individual participated in the planning of three murders was sufficient evidence to find him ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal under the serious nonpolitical crime bar.
The full text of Silva-Pereira v. Lynch can be found here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2016/07/07/14-70276.pdf