Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves Perlito Sulit and Estela Sulit, who appealed the denial of their habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. 2241, challenging deportation orders after overstaying their visas in the United States. Initially granted asylum and withholding of deportation by an Immigration Judge in 1994, the Board of Immigration Appeals vacated this decision in 1996, allowing them a voluntary departure period. The Sulits' subsequent adjustment of status was mistakenly approved by the INS, leading to their arrest and the confiscation of their green cards in 1998. Their habeas corpus petition in the Northern District of California was denied, a decision affirmed on appeal. In 2000, they filed another petition, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel and seeking suspension of deportation under § 244(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act; this was also denied. On appeal, the court reviewed the case de novo, affirming the lower court's ruling, emphasizing that new arguments regarding the BIA's authority, not previously raised, were not cognizable. The court noted that the cited Noriega-Lopez case was inapplicable, affirming the district court's decision, and stated that this disposition is not suitable for publication under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Legal Issues Addressed
Adjustment of Status and INS Errorsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The INS mistakenly approved the Sulits' adjustment of status application, resulting in the issuance of green cards, which were later confiscated.
Reasoning: While the INS's appeal was pending, the Sulits applied for an adjustment of status based on the IJ's asylum grant, which the INS mistakenly approved in October 1996, issuing them green cards.
Cognizability of New Arguments on Appealsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court refused to consider arguments regarding the BIA's authority that were not raised before the district court.
Reasoning: The court ruled that such claims not raised before the district court are not cognizable on appeal.
Habeas Corpus Petitions under 28 U.S.C. 2241subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The Sulits' habeas corpus petition was denied, and the denial was affirmed on appeal.
Reasoning: Perlito Sulit and Estela Sulit, citizens of the Philippines, appealed the denial of their habeas corpus petition under 28 U.S.C. 2241.
Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 2253(a)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court exercised its jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 2253(a) to review and affirm the lower court's decision.
Reasoning: The case falls under the jurisdiction of 28 U.S.C. 2253(a), and the court affirmed the lower court's decision.
Relevance of Precedent in Deportation Casessubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The cited case, Noriega-Lopez, was deemed irrelevant to the Sulits' situation concerning pre-IIRIRA deportation orders.
Reasoning: The court also commented on the relevance of the cited case, Noriega-Lopez, indicating that it did not apply to the current situation regarding pre-IIRIRA deportation orders.