Sandoval-Loffredo v. Gonzales, No. 04-1977.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtMorris Sheppard Arnold
Citation414 F.3d 892
PartiesHenry Eduardo SANDOVAL-LOFFREDO, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES,<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.
Docket NumberNo. 04-1977.
Decision Date13 July 2005
414 F.3d 892
Henry Eduardo SANDOVAL-LOFFREDO, Petitioner,
v.
Alberto GONZALES,1 Attorney General of the United States, Respondent.
No. 04-1977.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: February 18, 2005.
Filed: July 13, 2005.

Page 893

Paschal Obinna Nwokocha, argued, St. Paul, MN, for petitioner.

Ari Nazarov, argued, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC (Peter D. Keisler, Terri J. Scadron, and Leslie McKay, on brief), for respondent.

Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judge.


Petitioner Henry Eduardo Sandoval-Loffredo seeks review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals, which affirmed, without opinion, the decision of an immigration judge terminating Mr. Sandoval's permanent resident status, denying his admission to the United States, and ordering him removed to Ecuador. Mr. Sandoval argues that the IJ erred in classifying him, a lawful permanent resident of this country, as an alien seeking admission to the United States. We disagree and therefore deny the petition for review.

Page 894

Mr. Sandoval, a native and citizen of Ecuador, is married to a United States citizen and has been a lawful permanent resident of this country since 1996. He traveled to Canada in September of 2000 where he met with some of his relatives, including his brother, Richard. On September 4, 2000, Mr. Sandoval and Richard drove together to the Pembina, North Dakota, port of entry on the United States-Canadian border. Once there, the brothers sought entry into the United States: Mr. Sandoval did so as a returning lawful permanent resident, and his brother, a citizen of Ecuador, falsely claimed United States citizenship.

The former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)2 issued Mr. Sandoval a notice to appear, charging him with being inadmissible as an alien who "knowingly... encouraged, induced, assisted, abetted, or aided" another alien to enter the United States in violation of law, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(E)(i). The IJ found that Mr. Sandoval knew that his brother was going to claim to be a United States citizen, and that he assisted his brother's attempted illegal entry by telling the initial immigration inspector that his brother was a citizen; Mr. Sandoval challenges both of these findings.

Mr. Sandoval argues that because he is a permanent legal resident, he cannot be classified as inadmissible unless the government first proves by clear, convincing, and unequivocal evidence that he was properly regarded as an applicant for admission under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13)(C). That section provides that "[a]n alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence in the United States shall not be regarded as [an applicant for admission] unless the alien," inter alia, "has engaged in illegal activity after having departed the United States." Id. In essence, this statute states a general rule that an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence who is seeking to return to the United States, such as Mr. Sandoval, is not regarded as an applicant for admission, and then lists exceptions to this rule. See In re Collado-Munoz, 1998 WL 95929, 21 I. & N. Dec. 1061, 1064 (BIA 1998). Here, Mr. Sandoval argues that it was the INS's burden to establish that he falls within the exception for aliens who have engaged in illegal activity after their departure from the United States and that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • Singh v. Lynch, No. 15–1285.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • October 14, 2015
    ...as ‘conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.’ ” Sandoval–Loffredo v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 892, 895 (8th Cir.2005) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) ).B. Credibility “To qualify for asylum, [Singh] must show that he is unable or unwilling to ......
  • Singh v. Lynch, No. 15-1285
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • October 14, 2015
    ...findings as 'conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.'" Sandoval-Loffredo v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 892, 895 (8th Cir. 2005) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B)). B. Credibility "To qualify for asylum, [Singh] must show that he is unable or unwi......
  • Fraser v. Lynch, No. 14–3187.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • July 31, 2015
    ...established” Fraser had a Canadian conviction for possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. See Sandoval–Loffredo v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 892, 895 (8th Cir.2005) ; see also 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(3)(A) (The government bears the burden of proving an alien is deportable by “clear and c......
  • Diaz-Perez v. Holder, No. 13–1651.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • May 2, 2014
    ...as ‘conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.’ ” Sandoval–Loffredo v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 892, 895 (8th Cir.2005) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B)). In other words, “the IJ's findings must be upheld unless the alien demonstrates that the ev......
4 cases
  • Singh v. Lynch, No. 15–1285.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • October 14, 2015
    ...as ‘conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.’ ” Sandoval–Loffredo v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 892, 895 (8th Cir.2005) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) ).B. Credibility “To qualify for asylum, [Singh] must show that he is unable or unwilling to ......
  • Singh v. Lynch, No. 15-1285
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • October 14, 2015
    ...findings as 'conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.'" Sandoval-Loffredo v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 892, 895 (8th Cir. 2005) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B)). B. Credibility "To qualify for asylum, [Singh] must show that he is unable or unwi......
  • Fraser v. Lynch, No. 14–3187.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • July 31, 2015
    ...established” Fraser had a Canadian conviction for possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking. See Sandoval–Loffredo v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 892, 895 (8th Cir.2005) ; see also 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(3)(A) (The government bears the burden of proving an alien is deportable by “clear and c......
  • Diaz-Perez v. Holder, No. 13–1651.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • May 2, 2014
    ...as ‘conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.’ ” Sandoval–Loffredo v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 892, 895 (8th Cir.2005) (quoting 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B)). In other words, “the IJ's findings must be upheld unless the alien demonstrates that the ev......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT