Tagged: deportation Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 1:14 pm on June 11, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: deportation, legal rights   

    Educational Video About Deportation Court Proceedings 

    I have represented clients in deportation court on a regular basis for over 25 years. Such proceedings are very serious because if the client loses, the judge orders that they be deported. Of course, the deportation does not happen immediately because there is a lengthy appeals process and even if the client does not file an appeal, many times it could be months until arrangements are made for the actual deportation.

    Watch this video which explains a person’s legal rights and shows how the deportation court process works.

    If you wish to have a consultation regarding similar issues, visit our website or contact me.


    About the author: Bruce Coane is an attorney who specializes in labor and employment law and immigration law, with offices in Florida and Texas. He may be reached at houstonlaw@aol.com, 713-850-0066 or 305-538-6800.

    • How to Golf App 10:00 pm on March 6, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      Have you ever thought about writing an ebook or guest authoring on other blogs?

      I have a blog centered on the same ideas you discuss and would love to have you
      share some stories/information. I know my readers would appreciate your work.
      If you are even remotely interested, feel free to send me
      an e-mail.

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 3:19 pm on January 3, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: deportation, Hispanic Voters, , , Pew Hispanic Center survey   

    Deportation and the 2012 Election 

    President Barack Obama hasn’t quite received the satisfactory rating he had with the Hispanic voters in 2010, but a recent survey from the Pew Hispanic Center shows that many Hispanic voters still favor him in the 2012 elections.

    This survey was done with 1,220 Latino adults from all 50 states and the District of Colombia. The results that this survey got may not be conclusive, even though a lot of Hispanics are most likely to vote for him again, the percentage of the poll are divided into the way the Obama administration is handling the country’s general problems and the immigration and deportation problems specifically.

    Obama’s current approval rating among the general population is 46% which is 3% lower than what he received from the Pew survey’s 49%, but in 2010, he received a rating from the Latinos 9% higher at 58%. So what does this say?

    The respondents are aware that the Obama administration deports illegal immigrants faster than the previous administration did, and 77% of those who are aware of this object to the current deportation policies.

    However, high and low the ratings for Obama go, 91% of the respondents are in full support of broad immigration reform, including the naturalization of undocumented residents brought to the US as children, and the DREAM Act.


    Bruce Coane is a leading lawyer with 30 years of experience in the field of immigration law and employment law. He may be reached via email at houstonlaw@aol.com or his website at Coane and Associates.

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 6:26 pm on October 6, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "Shia Muslim", "ten year bar", "voluntary departure", asylum seekers, deportation, Karachi, Pakistan   

    USA Immigration from Pakistan 

    I just spoke with a potential client in Pakistan. He is a 25 year old man who just moved there from the USA, after spending 11 years in New Jersey.

    He returned to Pakistan via “voluntary departure” in order to avoid deportation. Unfortunately, and unbeknownst to him, once he left, another law kicked-in, preventing him from returning to the USA for 10 years. That law is known as the ten year bar.

    He was telling me how his city of Karachi seems totally lawless and that there are savage killings and mutilations almost every day. He expressed real fear as a minority Shia muslim that he could be a victim.

    My experience representing clients in court is that the immigration judges don’t give much credence to the fears expressed by Pakistani asylum seekers here. But, listening to the fear in this young man’s New Jersey-accented-voice, made the situation in Karachi seem very real. Unfortunately for him, though, there is no quick-fix that will allow him to return to the USA anytime soon.


    Bruce Coane is a leading lawyer with 30 years of experience in the field of immigration law and employment law. He may be reached via email at houstonlaw@aol.com or his website at Coane and Associates.

    • Nicholas Wellings 8:21 am on October 25, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      nab5 has some great deals and so far no known great scammers.

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 3:21 pm on August 23, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , deportation, , Morton Memos   

    The Obama administration announced last week that it… 

    The Obama administration announced last week that it was going to review all 300,000+ deportation court cases and consider dismissing some of them. The stated criteria for dismissal/closure was whether the personal has not been convicted of a serious crime and has not been a habitual immigration violator. This latest statement from the administration follows earlier pronouncements (known as the Morton memos) from ICE and DHS that they would be exercising prosecutorial discretion and terminating many deportation cases.

    Since the Morton memos have NOT been followed, at least from my observations in immigration court, I was very skeptical of the latest announcements last week, which led many to suggest it was a new amnesty. While there was no statement about amnesty, the administration did say that work permits would be issued to people whose cases were closed in this process.

    I suspected that it would be “business as usual”, based on my observations following the Morton memos. Following those memos, the local prosecutors in Houston exhibited no intention of dismissing any cases (except for some during the first few weeks). The problem is that the administration in Washington makes these bold pronouncements, yet nothing trickles down to their people in the field. So, the prosecutors and the judge act as though the memos and pronouncements have no effect on them.

    Today, I had a deportation case in immigration court and figured I’d test the waters. My client is a young woman from China, and had no problems with the law and is a full-time college student. I asked the prosecutor , Dean Emmons, and the Judge Lisa Luis if they would agree to close the case pursuant to the directives from Washington, DC. The judge said,”I’m not bound by the Morton memos,” and that this was “not the right forum. The prosecutor said that he was not willing to close the case.

    So, notwithstanding directives from Washington about the new amnesty, nothing has trickled down to the field. What the government should have done was to order an immediate halt to all deportation cases until they can review the files as was promised. Going forward with such cases, in light of directives from Washington saying to the contrary, is just plain wrong.

    In conclusion, there is no new amnesty and there is no stoppage of deportation cases, at least in Houston and Miami where I handle most of my cases.


    Bruce Coane is a leading lawyer with 30 years of experience in the field of immigration law and employment law. He may be reached via email at houstonlaw@aol.com or his website at Coane and Associates.

    • Troy Sim 4:40 pm on August 23, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      You’re right on. Until there is guidance from Washington, D.C. things won’t change.

    • Donna 7:48 pm on June 23, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      Before taking up space about things you know nothing about, Immigration Judges do not have the authority to extend prosecutorial discretion and the judge is right, it is NOT the forum for discussing it. Prosecutorial Discretion is just as the name suggests, at the discretion of the prosecutors. They are not obliged to terminate any case brought to them. They extend PD at their own discretion based on criminal history, immigration history and in many instances statements previously made by the respondents.

    • Bruce Coane 8:27 pm on June 23, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      I disagree Donna. A judge can discuss anything they choose to discuss, and can instruct the parties to discuss whatever the judge wants them to discuss. And, when I wrote this almost two years ago, I was a witness to government lawyers denying PD in Houston on many cases. Things may have changed since then, but in 2011, that was certainly the case from my personal observations.

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 9:14 pm on June 16, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: aggravated felony, Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, deportation, drug offense,   

    Supreme Court Ruling Saved Immigrant from Deportation 

    The Supreme Court has issued a decision this week that will help many non-citizens avoid being deported. A state drug offense is not considered an “aggravated felony” unless it is punishable as a felony under federal law. A second or subsequent simple possession drug offense is not punishable as a felony under federal law unless the prosecutor charges the defendant as a recidivist before trial or before a guilty plea. On June 14, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that when a defendant has been convicted of a second or subsequent simple possession drug offense that has not been enhanced as a result of a prior conviction, the defendant has not been convicted of an offense that is punishable as a felony under federal law and has therefore not been convicted of an “aggravated felony.” Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 2010 WL 2346552, at *11 (U.S. June 14, 2010).

    The Supreme Court’s decision will help one of my clients who is currently in deportation proceedings. His case was put on hold by the immigration judge, pending the outcome of this Supreme Court case. My client obtained his permanent residence (“green card”) in 1981, is married to a U.S. citizen, and has two simple possession drug convictions. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, my client was ineligible for cancellation of removal because he was considered to have been convicted of an “aggravated felony.” However, my client was not charged as a recidivist when he was prosecuted for his second simple possession drug offense. Therefore, as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision, my client is no longer considered to have been convicted of an “aggravated felony” and my client is now eligible to apply for cancellation of removal. If his application for cancellation of removal is granted, he will be able to remain in the United States. The Supreme Court’s decision has saved him from deportation.

    • Bill Hurst 11:04 pm on June 17, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      Civil sanctions imposed on United States citizens convicted of a felony in many states include the loss of competence to serve on a grand or petit jury or to vote in elections even after release from prison. While controversial, these disabilities are explicitly sanctioned by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, a Reconstruction-era amendment that deals with permissible state regulation of voting rights.

    • natalie byers 3:56 pm on June 23, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      I am desperately seeking advice (and searching for legal counsel) for the following case. I’m trying to help someone that I’ve known dearly for 11 years who was deported in 2004 to Mexico for a 2000 cocaine conviction/aggravated felony. He did 3 years probation, rehab and had completely turned his life back around to how it was before he made a few bad choices/friends when out of the blue he was deported.

      At the time of his deportation, the attorney did not give him his full options and said there was nothing that he could do. So, there was no fight to prevent the deportation. Obviously, had he known his rights/choices, the energy would have been placed into remaining into the country, getting the charges expunged/reduced or getting permission to be allowed back in the country after a few years.

      This gentleman was a permanent resident in San Diego, California for more than 30 years at the time of his deportation. His parents are both permanent US residents and his two younger brothers are natural US citizens. Obviously, everyone involved would love to see him get back into the States to be with family and also to start a new life (get married and live a law-abiding life).

      I know this is a severe and challenging case, but I’m determined to try every avenue to help fight for someone that was not given that opportunity and who deserves a second chance.

      • Coane & Associates 12:46 pm on June 28, 2010 Permalink | Reply

        We handle cases like this. Call our office. At 713 850 0066 to arrange a telephone appointment with Ajay Chaudhary, who specializes in criminal immigrant cases.

      • Coane & Associates 9:17 pm on July 7, 2010 Permalink | Reply

        I thought I replied to this, but don’t see it. Did you get my reply. We handle these types of cases regularly. You may call us at 713-850-0066 if you would like to arrange for a telephone appointment.

Compose new post
Next post/Next comment
Previous post/Previous comment
Show/Hide comments
Go to top
Go to login
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
%d bloggers like this: