FRITZ, CLARENCE ALEXANDER

A079-089-179
LASALLE DETENTION FACILITY
P.O. BOX560
TROUT, LA 71371
Name: FRITZ, CLARENCE ALEXANDER
U.S. Department of Justice
Executive Ofce fr Immigation Review
Board of Immigration Appeals
Ofce of the Chief Clerk
5 I 07 Leesburg Pike, Suite 2000
Fals Clurch, Vrginia 20530
FEDERAL DET. CENTER - OAKDALE 2
P.O. BOX 1128
OAKDALE, LA 71463
A 079-089-179
Date of this Notice: 4/28/2014
Enclosed is a copy of the Board's decision and order in the above-referenced case.
Enclosure
Panel Members:
Miller, Neil P.
Sincerely,
Donna Carr
Chief Clerk
For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Clarence Alexander Fritz, A079 089 179 (BIA Apr. 28, 2014)
U.S. Department of Justice
Executive Ofce fr Immigation Review
Decision of te Board of Immigation Appeals
FalJs Church, Virginia 20530
File: A079 089 179 - Oakdale, LA
In re: CLARNCE ALEXANDER FRITZ
IN REMOVAL PROCEEDIGS
MOTION
ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: Pro se
ON BEHALF OF DHS: Sherron Ashworth
Assistant Chief Counsel
APPLICATION: Reopening
Date:
APR 2 8 2014
The Boad entered the fnal administrative order on May 14, 2013, when we dismissed
the respondent's appeal of the Immigration Judge's decision ordering the respondent removed to
the Bahamas in conection with his aggavated flony bank faud conviction. The respondent
has fled a motion to reopen, based on a Louisiana criminal cour order vacating the respondent's
conviction. See generally Matter of Pickering, 23 I&N Dec. 621 (BIA 2003); Matter of Chavez,
24 I&N Dec. 272 (BIA 2007). The court order refects tat respondent's defnse counsel did
not advise the respondent that his guilty plea may have adverse immigration consequences.
Padilla v. Kentuck, 559 U.S. 356 (2010). The Deparent of Homelad Securty has not
responded to the motion; therefre, the motion is deemed unopposed. 8 C.F.R. 1003.2(g)(3).
The motion will be grated.
On remand, the Immigration Judge may receive additional evidence appropriate to the fll
resolution of this mater, including additional or substituted charges of removability, if any.
See 8 C.F.R. 1003.30 ad 1240.lO(e). Accordingly, the record will be remanded to the
Immigration Judge fr further consideration of the respondent's removability in light of the
evidence of the vacated conviction, and fr fher consideration of te respondent's eligibility
fr relief fom removal.
ORDER: The respondent's removal proceedings are reopened.
FURTHER ORER: The record is remanded to the Immigration Judge fr fer
proceedings not inconsistent with this order.
FOR TEBOAR
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t

&

R
e
f
u
g
e
e

A
p
p
e
l
l
a
t
e

C
e
n
t
e
r

|

w
w
w
.
i
r
a
c
.
n
e
t
Cite as: Clarence Alexander Fritz, A079 089 179 (BIA Apr. 28, 2014)