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 22041

FLORES-SANCHEZ, DELFINO A201-101-216 SENECA COUNTY JAIL 3040 SOUTH SR 100 TIFFIN, OH 44883

OHS/ICE Office of Chief Counsel - CLE 1240 E. 9th St., Room 585 Cleveland, OH 44199

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Name: FLORES-SANCHEZ, DELFINO

A 201-101-216

Date of this notice: 9/27/2013

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

DOWtL CWVt.J
Donna Carr Chief Clerk

Enclosure

Panel Members: Guendelsberger, John

Lulseges Userteam : Docket

For more unpublished BIA decisions, visit www.irac.net/unpublished

Cite as: Delfino Flores-Sanchez, A201 101 216 (BIA Sept. 27, 2013)

.. U.S. Department of Justice

Falls Church, Virginia 22041

Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Executive Office for Immigration Review

File:

A201 101 216 - Cleveland, OH

Date:

SEP. 17 2013

In re: DELFINO FLORES-SANCHEZ

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS APPEAL ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF DHS: Pro se

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

Amy L. Scheurman Assistant Chief Counsel

The respondent, a native and citizen of Mexico, appeals the decision of the Immigration 1 Judge, dated June 3, 2013, ordering his removal from the United States. The respondent's appeal, which is opposed by the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS"), will be dismissed. We affirm the Immigration Judge's decision. The respondent is subject to removal from the United States because he is an alien who is present in this country without being admitted or paroled or who arrived at any time or place other than as designated by the Attorney General (l.J. at 1-2; Tr. at 5-7; Exh. 1). See section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). Even though the respondent is apparently a diabetic and requires ongoing medical care, he has not established that he is eligible for any form of relief from removal which can be granted by an Immigration Judge or this Board (l.J. at 2-3).

See section 240(c)(4)(A) of the Act,

8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)(4)(A); 8 C.F.R. 1240.S(d); see also 8 C.F.R. 1240.l(a)(l) (enumerating many of the forms of relief from removal which can be granted by an Immigration Judge). If the respondent believes that, in light of humanitarian or equitable concerns, he should be permitted to remain in this country, he is not precluded from requesting a stay of removal from the DHS.

See 8 C.F.R. 241.6. However, as we decline to disturb the Immigration Judge's decision to
order his removal from the United States to Mexico, the following order is entered. ORDER: The respondent's appeal is dismissed.

As removal proceedings are separate and apart from bond proceedings, we lack jurisdiction to

consider issues concerning the respondent's custody status in the instant removal proceedings.

See 8 C.F.R. 1003.19(d).

Cite as: Delfino Flores-Sanchez, A201 101 216 (BIA Sept. 27, 2013)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION COURT CLEVELAND, OHIO

File: A201-101-216 In the Matter of

June 3, 2013

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

DELFINO FLORES-SANCHEZ RESPONDENT

) ) )

IN REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS

CHARGE:

Section 212(a)(6)(A)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, in that you are an alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled or who arrived in the United States at any time or place other than as designated by the Attorney General.

APPLICATIONS:

None.

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: PRO SE ON BEHALF OF OHS: AMY SCHEURMAN, Esquire Assistant Chief Counsel

ORAL DECISION OF THE IMMIGRATION JUDGE The respondent is a 32-year-old m ale, born June 19, 1980 according to the 1-213 which is marked as Exhibit 2 in this matter. The respondent is a native and citizen of Mexico. The respondent was issued the Notice to Appear on April 29, 2013, which was personally served on him on that date. At a Master Calendar hearing conducted on May 22, 2013, the respondent

appeared before the Court by video teleconferencing at Seneca County Jail in Tiffin, Ohio. A Spanish language interpreter was present in the courtroom who had been sworn. Respondent acknowledged receipt of a copy of the Notice to Appear and a copy of the list of free legal service providers. The Court explained the Notice to Appear and

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

explained the respondent's rights in these removal proceedings. The respondent requested a continuance in order to obtain the services of counsel and the matter was rescheduled for June 3, 2013, at 8:00 a.m. On June 3, 2013, the respondent appeared before the Court by video teleooRfeFeRGiRg teleconference from Seneca County Jail in Tiffin, Ohio. A Spanish language interpreter was present in the courtroom who had been sworn. Respondent was not represented by counsel. The Court inquired as to the truth of the factual allegations in the Notice to Appear. Respondent informed the Court that factual allegations 1 and 2 are true and further informed the Court that his first entry into the United States was in April of 2000 aAQ-when he crossed the Arizona, Mexico border. The respondent had no visa to enter the United States and was not admitted or paroled into the United States after inspection by an Immigration officer. The Court finds, therefore, by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent is an alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled. He is, therefore inadmissible, as charged"' and, consequently, is removable. The respondent designated Mexico as the country for removal. He informed the Court that he has no fear of returning to Mexico. The respondent is single, has no children. His parents were born in Mexico and currently live in Mexico, although they lived in the United States illegally for a period of approximately 20 years. The respondent has a copy of his Mexican birth certificate, however, he does not

A201-101-216

June 3, 2013

have sufficient funds to purchase transportation to Mexico. He, therefore, does not appear to be eligible for a grant of voluntary departure. As the respondent has been found removable by clear and convincing evidence and as there is no form of relief from removal for which the respondent appears to

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

currently be eligible, including voluntary departure, the Court makes the following order. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that the respondent be removed from the United States to Mexico.

Please see the next page for electronic signature

D. WILLIAM EVANS, JR. Immigration Judge

A201-101-216

June 3, 2013

/Isl/ Immigration Judge D. WILLIAM EVANS, JR.

evansw on July 11, 2013 at 9:37 AM GMT

Immigrant & Refugee Appellate Center | www.irac.net

A201-101-216

June 3, 2 013