Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

jurisdictionattorneystatuteappealhearinghabeas corpusparoleasylumnaturalization
jurisdictionattorneystatuteappealhearinghabeas corpusparoleasylumnaturalization

Related Cases

Soriano v. Gonzales
View Case »
Leke v. Hott
View Case »
Zhong v. Department of Justice
View Case »
William v. AES Corp.
View Case »
Simental-Galarza v. Barr
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Gerrero v. Moyer

Facts

Alex Rodriguez Gerrero is a Cuban native who landed in Key West, Florida, in May 1980, as part of the well-publicized 'Mariel Boat Lift.' Gerrero came to this country without authorization, but he asked for political asylum. The Attorney General of the United States paroled Gerrero into the United States pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5) (1976), as amended. Gerrero remained as a parolee until November 30, 1989, when the government revoked his parole due to two criminal convictions. The INS served Gerrero with a Notice of Parole Revocation and commenced exclusion proceedings, but the immigration judge administratively closed the case when Gerrero was hospitalized on the day of his hearing. Gerrero subsequently filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Alex Rodriguez Gerrero is a Cuban native who landed in Key West, Florida, in May 1980, as part of the well-publicized 'Mariel Boat Lift.' Gerrero came to this country without authorization, but he asked for political asylum. The Attorney General of the United States paroled Gerrero into the United States pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5) (1976), as amended. Gerrero remained as a parolee until November 30, 1989, when the government revoked his parole due to two criminal convictions. The INS served Gerrero with a Notice of Parole Revocation and commenced exclusion proceedings, but the immigration judge administratively closed the case when Gerrero was hospitalized on the day of his hearing. Gerrero subsequently filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Issue

The main legal issue was whether the court had jurisdiction to hear Gerrero's petition for a writ of habeas corpus given the circumstances of his parole and the administrative closure of his case.

The main legal issue was whether the court had jurisdiction to hear Gerrero's petition for a writ of habeas corpus given the circumstances of his parole and the administrative closure of his case.

Rule

The court applied the legal principles that jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. 1252 and 1105a(b) requires a formal admission of the alien into the United States, and that administrative closures do not constitute final orders for purposes of appeal.

The court applied the legal principles that jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. 1252 and 1105a(b) requires a formal admission of the alien into the United States, and that administrative closures do not constitute final orders for purposes of appeal.

Analysis

The court analyzed the jurisdictional statutes and determined that it could not exercise jurisdiction over Gerrero's case because he had never been formally admitted into the United States as anything other than a parolee. Since the government could not deport him under 1252, and there was no final order of exclusion under 1105a(b), the court concluded it lacked the authority to grant the writ of habeas corpus.

The court analyzed the jurisdictional statutes and determined that it could not exercise jurisdiction over Gerrero's case because he had never been formally admitted into the United States as anything other than a parolee. Since the government could not deport him under 1252, and there was no final order of exclusion under 1105a(b), the court concluded it lacked the authority to grant the writ of habeas corpus.

Conclusion

The court dismissed Gerrero's petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

The court dismissed Gerrero's petition for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Who won?

The District Director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service prevailed in the case because the court found it lacked jurisdiction to hear Gerrero's petition.

The District Director of the Immigration and Naturalization Service prevailed in the case because the court found it lacked jurisdiction to hear Gerrero's petition.

You must be