DUI defense Attorney David Moyse convinced a Montgomery county district court judge to suppress the traffic stop in a DUI case, resulting in a dismissal of all charges. Moyse’s cross-examination of the officer brought out several favorable facts for his client, after which the judge determined that the officer should have never stopped his client. Moyse’s client was acquitted of all charges.
In October 2014, attorney David Moyse successfully persuaded a prosecutor to dismiss charges of driving while under the influence of marijuana, having his client plea instead to negligent driving. This offense carried only one point and no jail, instead of a possible one year in jail. Moyse highlighted inconsistencies in the officers reports and notes to convince the arresting officer and prosecutor to give his client such a generous deal.
In October, 2014, Attorney Rand Lucey convinced a Montgomery County judge to rule that police had illegally stopped his client, resulting in an acquittal on all charges. Despite the fact that his client had skidded and come within a foot of striking a police cruiser, Mr. Lucey convinced the judge that officers had no legal right to stop his client’s vehicle and investigate a DWI. With the ruling, the prosecutor was unable to introduce evidence that Defendant’s blood alcohol level was more than twice the legal limit.
In September 2014, Attorney Rand Lucey convinced a prosecutor to vacate his client’s 1995 possession conviction and dismiss the charge. Mr. Lucey’s client had lived in the United States for almost 30 years but had been unable to obtain citizenship and was at risk for deportation due to the conviction. Mr. Lucey filed a Coram Nobis Petition in Queen Anne’s County, arguing that defects in his client’s guilty plea entitled him to a new trial. Prior to arguing before the judge, the State’s Attorney elected to dismiss the charge. The result cleared the way for the client to immediately apply for citizenship.
Maryland Immigration lawyer Himedes V. Chicas successfully represented a family of four in removal proceedings, fighting to ensure that they would all remain in the United States as lawful permanent residents. The family was collectively placed into removal proceedings following a federal investigation into the fraudulent activities of an unscrupulous employer that had sponsored the principal beneficiary for an employment based immigrant visa more than eleven years ago. Due to that employer’s admitted fraud, it was alleged that the principal beneficiary in this case had also directly committed immigration fraud in obtaining his immigrant visa. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) therefore charged the principal’s immigrant visa as being invalid and placed him into removal proceedings. As the other three family members were derivatives of that family member’s immigrant visa, the DHS also sought to deport them from the country.
After appearing before the Immigration Judge in the family’s joined proceedings, immigration Attorney Chicas successfully sought a severance of the principal beneficiary’s case from the derivative beneficiaries’ cases, given that only the principal was directly charged with having committed fraud. Moreover, immigration lawyer Chicas convinced the Court to schedule and to proceed with the derivatives’ cases before the principal’s case. Subsequently, Attorney Chicas convinced the DHS Chief Counsel’s Office to grant a favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion to the derivative beneficiaries through a stipulation to the granting of a 237(a)(1)(H) waiver. The Immigration Judge issued an order granting the 237(a)(1)(H) waiver to the derivative beneficiaries, thus ensuring that they would maintain their LPR status.
Throughout the course of the proceedings, the principal beneficiary vehemently denied that he had ever knowingly participated or knew of the employer’s admitted fraudulent conduct or misrepresentations, much less had ever directly committed immigration fraud. Attorney Chicas thus held the DHS to its burden of proof, and due to the lack of evidence offered by the DHS regarding the principal’s alleged direct fraud, the DHS withdrew the fraud charges against him. He still, however, required a waiver in order to maintain his LPR status, and Attorney Chicas sought a 237(a)(1)(H) waiver for him as well. This time, however, the DHS did not stipulate to its granting and the primary issue for the Immigration Judge to consider was whether the principal deserved a favorable exercise of discretion. At the contested merits hearing, the principal testified in support of his wavier and after considering the numerous favorable equities in his case, the Immigration Judge also granted the principal’s 237(a)(1)(H).
The 237(a)(1)(H) waiver is an often overlooked, but powerful relief option for individuals who have been charged with fraud or misrepresentation (whether willful or innocent) in the acquisition of their permanent residence. An LPR may apply for a 237(a)(1)(H) waiver if he or she: (1) has a qualifying family member such as a USC or LPR spouse, parent, son or daughter; (2) had an immigrant visa or valid entry document at the time of admission; (3) was otherwise admissible at the time of admission except for any inadmissibility that was the direct result of the fraud or misrepresentation; and (4) demonstrates that he or she merits a favorable exercise of discretion.
After nearly four years of litigation, this family of four can now rest assured that the underlying validity of their legal permanent residence will not be called into question again. The icing on the cake: the three derivative beneficiaries are now all naturalized U.S. citizens.
This past week Maryland Immigration lawyer Himedes Chicas received confirmation from the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)—Criminal Alien Program (CAP) unit that an immigration detainer filed against a JKM client, currently serving a sentence at a county detention center, was lifted.
The ICE-CAP Unit mistakenly placed the immigration detainer against the JKM Client, under the incorrect assumption that he was a Lawful Permanent Resident. The ICE detainer was an impediment to the Client eligibility for work release through the county’s Pre-release Center. After speaking with the Client’s family, however, it was determined that the Client had in fact derived U.S. citizenship under immigration law.
Pursuant to the Child Citizenship Act of 2000, as codified in sections 320 and 322 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, a child born outside of the U.S. automatically becomes a citizen when all of the following conditions have been fulfilled:
1. At least one parent of the child is a citizen of the United States, whether by birth or naturalization;
2. The child is under the age of eighteen years at the time of the parent’s naturalization;
3. The child is residing in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the citizen parent pursuant to a lawful admission for permanent residence.
In this case, the JKM Client derived citizenship through his mother and met all the requirements set forth under that provision. After getting in contact with the officers at the ICE-CAP unit, and providing them with a written explanation and documentary proof of the Client’s derivative citizenship, the detainer was ultimately lifted.
To discuss or assess derivative citizenship claims please contact Immigration lawyer Himedes Chicas directly on his cell at 202.384.2647.
Maryland Personal Injury Attorney Jennifer Winters won a difficult case in which the details of how and where the motor vehicle accident occurred were in dispute. On cross-examination Attorney Winters completely discredited the Defendant driver’s version of events. The Court found the Defendant liable and awarded our client almost three times the amount of his medical bills, plus lost wages. There was no offer by the insurance company before trial.
Maryland Personal Injury lawyer Jennifer Winters took a serious car accident case to trial to force the insurance company to fully compensate our injured client, after receiving several low offers from the insurance company. In this case, our client’s vehicle was sideswiped, which caused the vehicle to completely flip upside down. Our client was forced to crawl out of the vehicle through the windshield. The insurance company argued that our client was not seriously injured because our client’s pain improved after only a few weeks of treatment. The Court and Attorney Winters disagreed, and ultimately, the Court awarded the Plaintiff his full medical bills as well as a significant amount to compensate him for his pain and suffering due to the serious nature of the accident.
D.C. criminal lawyer David Wooten recently won an assault trial in front of a D.C. Superior Court judge. Three government witnesses failed to convince the judge beyond a reasonable doubt, while Mr. Wooten’s client testified credibly that he acted in self defense. The victory was essential for the Defendant, who would have faced serious immigration consequences with a criminal conviction on his record.
In Anne Arundel County District Court, attorney David Wooten convinced a judge to find his client Not Guilty of theft at the Maryland Live Casino. This amazing result came despite the Defendant being caught “red handed” on casino security footage, picking up and combing through a lost wallet. The victim, an elderly house wife, swore that the Defendant removed $1,500 from the wallet. The judge begrudgingly agreed with Mr. Wooten that reasonable doubt existed.