U.S.

Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals Office of the Clerk

5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000 Falls Church, Virginia 20530

Goldman, Maurice Henri Goldman & Goldman PC 1575 West Ina Rd. Tucson, AZ 85704

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - FLO P 0 Box 25158 Phoenix, AZ 85002

. .

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: SALAZAR-AGUILAR, RICARDO

A 087-448-782

Date of this notice: 2112/2014

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case. Sincerely,

bcnrtL {!tVVt.J
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members: Guendelsberger, John

schuckec Userteam: Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Ricardo Salazar-Aguilar, A087 448 782 (BIA Feb. 12, 2014)

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review

Board ofImmigration Appeals Office ofthe Clerk

5107 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000 Falls Church, Virginia 20530

SALAZAR-AGUILAR, RICARDO ICE, PINAL COUNTY JAIL 971 JASON LOPEZ CIRCLE FLORENCE, AZ 85132

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - FLO P.O. Box 25158 Phoenix, AZ 85002

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: SALAZAR-AGUILAR, RICARDO

A 087-448-782

Date of this notice: 2/12/2014

Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision in the above-referenced case. This copy is being provided to you as a courtesy. Your attorney or representative has been served with this decision pursuant to 8 C.F.R. 1292.S(a). If the attached decision orders that you be removed from the United States or affirms an Immigration Judge's decision ordering that you be removed, any petition for review of the attached decision must be filed with and received by the appropriate court of appeals within 30 days of the date of the decision. Sincerely,

DOYl.ltL caAA)
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure
Panel Members: Guendelsberger, John

schuckec Userteam: Docket

Cite as: Ricardo Salazar-Aguilar, A087 448 782 (BIA Feb. 12, 2014)

U.S. Department of Justice

Executive Office for Immigration Review Falls Church, Virginia 20530

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

File:

A087 448 782 - Florence, AZ

Date:

FEB 12 2014

In re: RICARDO SALAZAR-AGUILAR IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

APPEAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: CHARGE: Notice: Sec. 212( a)(6)(A)(i) , l&N Act [ 8 U .S.C. l 182 (a)(6)(A)(i)] Present without being admitted or paroled 212(a)(2 )( A)(i)(I), l& N Act [ 8 U.S.C. Crime involving moral turpitude Maurice H. Goldman, Esquire

Sec.

1182 (a)(2 )(A)(i )(I)]

APPLICATION: Voluntary departure

On July 29, 2011, this Board issued a decision upholding the Immigration Judge's March 21, 2011, denial of the respondent's application for cancellation of removal. The respondent then filed a petition for review of the Board's July 29, 2011, decision with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On August 26, 2011, the respondent filed a motion to reopen with this Board asking that his proceedings be reopened so that he could apply for voluntary departure. On October 21, 2011, we denied the respondent's motion to reopen. On July 3, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted the government's unopposed motion to remand this case to this Board so that we may address the respondent's argument that he was denied due process in his removal proceedings when the Immigration Judge "failed to inform him of his apparent eligibility for 'pre-conclusion' voluntary departure." See Government's Unopposed Motion to Remand and Dismiss at 1. Similarly, in the respondent's appeal brief filed with this Board on July 26, 2011, the respondent stated that "it appears that Mr. Salazar was never accorded the opportunity to request voluntary departure before the" Immigration Judge.

The respondent is a native and citizen of Mexico.

See

Respondent's Brief at 5.

As we noted in our October 21, 2011, decision, the Immigration Judge appeared to indicate at the respondent's March 21, 2011, hearing that, as a matter of discretion, he would not grant the respondent's request for voluntary departure based on the respondent's criminal record (I.J. at 24; Tr. at 2 8). See Matter ofArguelles-Campos, 22 l&N Dec. 811, 816 (BIA 1999) (noting that, under section 240B(a) of the Act, the respondent must merit a favorable exercise of discretion). Nonetheless, the Immigration Judge did not indicate in his decision that he considered the respondent's request for voluntary departure or his reasons for the denial. An explanation of the reasons in the transcript is not sufficient. See Matter ofA-P-, 22 I&N Dec. 468, 476 (BIA 1999) . Also, the Immigration Judge did not make factual findings in support of his conclusion.

See

Cite as: Ricardo Salazar-Aguilar, A087 448 782 (BIA Feb. 12, 2014)

. .

A087 448 782

Matter of S-H-,

23 I&N Dec. 462, 465 (BIA 2002) (given the Board's limited fact-finding function, it is "increasingly important for the Immigration Judge to make clear and complete findings of fact that are supported by the record and in compliance with controlling law."). For these reasons, we will remand this case to the Immigration Judge to address the respondent's request in the first instance. Accordingly, the following order will be entered.

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

ORDER:

The record is remanded to the Immigration Judge for further proceedings

consistent with this opinion and the entry of a new decision.

Cite as: Ricardo Salazar-Aguilar, A087 448 782 (BIA Feb. 12, 2014)