Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-2934 Stroe v. INS

Minnesota Lawyer//July 2, 2001

00-2934 Stroe v. INS

Minnesota Lawyer//July 2, 2001

“The Board held that the Stroes in moving to reopen the deportation proceeding on the basis of Adkison’s alleged ineffective assistance had satisfied (1), but not (2) or (3). Regarding (2), the Stroes had notified Adkison with regard to his failure to file the brief on time, but not with regard to other claims of ineffective assistance on which they based the motion to reopen, including failure to present essential facts bearing on the Stroes’ claim for asylum – their only defense to being deported. By not giving Adkison an opportunity to comment on this claim, the Stroes denied the Board of Immigration Appeals an opportunity to evaluate the significance of Adkison’s failure to file a brief. Suppose Adkison had good reasons not to present additional facts to the immigration judge. Then, even if Adkison had filed a timely brief, it might be clear that the appeal would have failed for want of a solid factual basis for the claim for asylum.”


Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Posner, J.

Top News

See All Top News

Legal calendar

Click here to see upcoming Minnesota events

Expert Testimony

See All Expert Testimony