Case Question?
 

I know two people: Victims of the same notario.

Both families filed for political asylum in the early 1990s. They were ordered deported. Immigration deported Person A in March 2007. Person re-entered around the same time but was already 16. Person B was deported May 2007 and re-entered a couple of days later. Person was already about 20 years old. They both arrived when they were children and resided continuously until their deportations. Have you heard of a similar case? Have they successfully applied for DACA? My initial reaction was no they are not eligible because the instructions for I821D say that departures must be brief an not because of a deportation order (Pg 5-6). However, the more I thought about it I felt they might be eligible since it was before June 15, 2007 and not during the continuous residency period. Thoughts?

Re: Case Question?
 

But don't they get like a 10 year ban after deportation? They re-enter illegally again and would face bigger charges for that.
This reminds me of George Lopez. "Wait for me tia, I'm getting deported hold my plate and wave so flies won't get on it" hahaha

Re: Case Question?
 

Yes, they would because of the 1996 bill. I e-mailed a couple of friend lawyers I know to see what they think the risk is. They were both told not to apply by their lawyer already. The guy is only about 1 out of 2 immigration lawyers in town though.

We live in Cali so they fit all the AB540 requirements, so they work and go to college. They graduated from H.S. and everything.

Re: Case Question?
 

If they got their fingerprints and info, I wouldn't apply.

Re: Case Question?
 

I would think a deportation is one the main reasons affecting continuous residency before June 15, 2012 according to the FAQ. Seems pretty clear to me they aren't :(

Re: Case Question?
 

what do you mean?
Do you think Continous residency is counted from 6/15/07-6/15/2012 or do you think is just before June 15, 2012.

The actual travel date it says is August 15, 2012.?

Re: Case Question?
 

I see what you mean why they might be eligible since their reentry was before June 15, 2007. I was going by the FAQ chart that doesn't mention that date.

However, I'd advise those people against applying now simply because a reentry to the US is considered a felony and that might raise some red flags when they are getting their cases looked at and they might deny them DACA and of course, have a potential to get deported again. And since there isn't enough precedent yet on how USCIS is handling these, perhaps it's best that they wait to see how cases like that will be handled. In this one, lawyers would be needed for sure, this is definitely not a good case for self-filing.

Re: Case Question?
 

I also forgot to add that their case might be even harder because they were not minors when they got deported and reentered. I would think if it was the other way around, it would help, but you said one of them was 20 so that just aggravates things.

Re: Case Question?
 

I actually did not know that. I thought it was a civil infraction. Yeah, they need lawyers for sure. However, I think they need to find better than what is around this town. They are not related. Their families are just friends that is how they fell victims to the same notario.

I think I will advice them to wait to see if anything is going to happen next year with dream or cir and until more precedent is established with DACA.

Re: Case Question?
 

I'm pretty sure it is (of course, technically they haven't been convicted if they haven't been caught), and if it isn't, it is a least a federal crime, so entering an application has the potential to be very detrimental as if they get deported again, they might ban them for life from entering the US. I have often heard that reentering after a deportation is about one of the worst decisions you can make and very hard to defend if you ever try to gain legal status. They must consult with a lawyer and see what their chances really are.