Work VisasGreen CardsAppealsDeportationFamily VisasStudent VisasOther

Payment for phone consultation with US immigration attorney

Credit Card Payment

Spanish
French
Russian
Arabic
Italian
Brasilian
German
Chinese
Korean
Japanese
Free Phone Consultation with US immigration attorney

Visas: H, L, O, P, Q, R and E are available for Premium processing. The Premium processing requires an additional $1,000.00 fee and USCIS guarantees a response within 15 working days.

 

Deportation after Political asylum trial

Applicants who do not enter the United States legally may also apply for asylum with USCIS. Illegal immigrants caught at the border and placed in deportation may also apply for asylum. Applicants already in deportation or exclusion proceedings do not have the opportunity to present their cases to the USCIS, but may present their claim to an immigration judge at an asylum trial.

While the facts are extremely important in any asylum case, an effective presentation of the case can mean the difference between success and failure. There are several elements which can assist an applicant in effectively presenting their asylum case. They are:

    A.The Statement of the Applicant
      The statement of the applicant should set forth in detail the applicant's past history of persecution and threats of persecution and the applicant's basis for fearing further persecution should he or she return to his or her home country. The declaration should be very broad and should , in essence, be a life story of the applicant, and his or her opinions and activities.
    B. Affidavits and Letters
      Supporting affidavits or letters should be included as part of the application if available. These documents should establish the nature of the applicant's opinions and activities, and the persecution that he or she faces as a result of these opinions or activities. Affidavits are obviously better proof than letters since, they are sworn statements
    C. Other Evidence
      The applicant should also try to determine if there is other evidence which might be used to win his or her case. For example, in a case once prepared in my office, the applicant was able to obtain a secret list written by his opponents which contained his name. We were able to show that people on the list were persecuted and that the applicant faced persecution as well.
There are no discriminatory regulations in penal law concerning asylum seekers. Anyhow, in cases of graver crimes, the foreign nationality of the suspect, together with a lack of "regular circumstances of life" (labour, family bands etc.), which is in most cases characteristic for asylum seekers, may constitute a special reason to uphold pre-trial-detention. Apart from this aspect, there is no visible discrimination of asylum seekers (or of foreigners in general) neither by US penal law nor by the procedural or sentencing practice of criminal courts. (Anyhow, it must also be stated that the question who and whether and why is being put before court is -at least in "minor" cases- very much dependent on the police who are often mandated by the court with the pre-examination of facts and whose known discriminatory opinion on certain groups of foreigners.

Even though there is no discrimination visible in the sentencing practice of US criminal courts, there are plenty of negative consequences for foreigners in general and for asylum seekers in special which may result from the mere fact of an indictment, and even more so from a verdict: P.ex., a verdict for having committed a "non-minor" crime, even though the sentence itself is considerably small or if its execution has been conditioned on probation, may give leave to the asylum authorities to examine whether or not the asylum-seekers has, by committing this crime, disqualified for a granting of political asylum. Although a deportation could then still be found as being contrary the status of the refugee will be that of mere "toleration", not of integration within the society.

This practice is being fully covered by the Constitutional as well as by the Administrative Courts who both argue that the foreigners' police authorities are free to judge an individual case from the public security's point of view - by doing so, they shall neither have to wait for a court's decision on the accusation, nor shall they be bound by the court's opinion on the quality of the crime committed or on the ability of the individual to resocialize.

Therefore, by distinguishing on a merely argumentative level between the "aims" of penal law and those of foreigners' police law, foreigners often find themselves in the situation that the Criminal court had not found it necessary to execute the imposed sentence in order to keep them from committing further crimes, but the foreigners' police authorities are nonetheless entitled to prohibit the further residence "for the sake of public security".

Only as a last possibility there can also be filed a complaint to the Constitutional and/or Administrative Court, whose judges can only examine the case on its merits regarded at the time and facts of the security directorate's decision, and only as far as facts had already found way into the files before. If the Constitutional and/or Administrative Court find the decision examined to have violated the law, the security directorate's decision has to be renewed; if not, the complaint is being rejected, ignoring the fact that plenty of time may have passed already during which the foreigner had been able to proof his compliance with the law (term of probation passed, no new commitments etc.).

It need not be stated that it is very difficult for an asylum seeker to receive a fair asylum procedure from out of prison. Furthermore, the mere suspision of having committed a crime is one of the reasons entitling to throw asylum seekers out of federal care programmes. As this federal care (housing, food, medical care) is only being granted to asylum seekers on a voluntary basis, there is no legal remedy for the asylum seeker against such a decision.

Finally, it also has to be remarked that asylum seekers frequently have to face criminal charges in connection with the way they came to US and with the prooves produced before the authorities for their asylum claim (i.e. use of false documents, use of documents belonging to somebody else).

Even though criminal courts' sentences in cases like these are generally quite low, they are in most cases enough to effectuate the loss of federal care and the prohibition of residence.

Besides criminal penalties, there do also exist "administrative fines" which are not being imposed by a judge but by the police, p.ex. because of traffic offences. Foreigners and especially asylum seekers are often confronted with such "administrative fines" for lack of visa, illegal entry, failing to register their habitation etc. If the fine imposed is not being paid, it has to be served in police prisons (terms of several days).

As far as asylum seekers are concerned, the police's decision to prohibit further residence may not be executed by deportation before there is a final decision on their asylum claim, as well as on the admissibility of deportation.

Please call us for a consultation at (646) 220-4697
We charge $95 for it. If we will take your case we will include this charge in to your total balance for the case. Normally we can answer most if not all of your questions about your case from the first call especially if you include explanation of your case in your initial e-mail, so we can be prepared with more detail. But if your case is really complicated or need some more research or will be updated soon , after the consultation we will provide you with call back number so you can call to our Attorney for the follow up or results of research of your issue. Please note that we are a LAW FIRM, so we do take responsibility for any advise we give or any transaction we conduct.



© 2003 - 2008 US Visa Now.
Design by MoreThanSite.com.
Our Partners: