C.F.R. » Title 8 » CHAPTER V—EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL PROVISIONS › PART 1003—EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW › Subpart C—Immigration Court—Rules of Procedure

8 C.F.R. § 1003.44

Special motion to seek section 212(c) relief for aliens who pleaded guilty or nolo contendere to certain crimes before April 1, 1997

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Standard for adjudication. This section applies to certain aliens who formerly were lawful permanent residents, who are subject to an administratively final order of deportation or removal, and who are eligible to apply for relief under former section 212(c) of the Act and 8 CFR 1212.3 with respect to convictions obtained by plea agreements reached prior to a verdict at trial prior to April 1, 1997. A special motion to seek relief under section 212(c) of the Act will be adjudicated under the standards of this section and 8 CFR 1212.3. This section is not applicable with respect to any conviction entered after trial.

(b) General eligibility. The alien has the burden of establishing eligibility for relief, including the date on which the alien and the prosecution agreed on the plea of guilt or nolo contendere. Generally, a special motion under this section to seek section 212(c) relief must establish that the alien:

(1) Was a lawful permanent resident and is now subject to a final order of deportation or removal;

(2) Agreed to plead guilty or nolo contendere to an offense rendering the alien deportable or removable, pursuant to a plea agreement made before April 1, 1997;

(3) Had seven consecutive years of lawful unrelinquished domicile in the United States prior to the date of the final administrative order of deportation or removal; and

(4) Is otherwise eligible to apply for section 212(c) relief under the standards that were in effect at the time the alien's plea was made, regardless of when the plea was entered by the court.

(c) Aggravated felony definition. For purposes of eligibility to apply for section 212(c) relief under this section and 8 CFR 1212.3, the definition of aggravated felony in section 101(a)(43) of the Act is that in effect at the time the special motion or the application for section 212(c) relief is adjudicated under this section. An alien shall be deemed to be ineligible for section 212(c) relief if he or she has been charged and found deportable or removable on the basis of a crime that is an aggravated felony, except as provided in 8 CFR 1212.3(f)(4).

(d) Effect of prior denial of section 212(c) relief. A motion under this section will not be granted with respect to any conviction where an alien has previously been denied section 212(c) relief by an immigration judge or by the Board on discretionary grounds.

(e) Scope of proceedings. Proceedings shall be reopened under this section solely for the purpose of adjudicating the application for section 212(c) relief, but if the immigration judge or the Board grants a motion by the alien to reopen the proceedings on other applicable grounds under 8 CFR 1003.2 or 1003.23 of this chapter, all issues encompassed within the reopened proceedings may be considered together, as appropriate.

(f) Procedure for filing a special motion to seek section 212(c) relief. An eligible alien shall file a special motion to seek section 212(c) relief with the immigration judge or the Board, whichever last held jurisdiction over the case. An eligible alien must submit a copy of the Form I-191 application, and supporting documents, with the special motion. The motion must contain the notation “special motion to seek section 212(c) relief.” The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) shall have 45 days from the date of filing of the special motion to respond. In the event the DHS does not respond to the motion, the DHS retains the right in the proceedings to contest any and all issues raised.

(g) Relationship to motions to reopen or reconsider on other grounds—(1) Other pending motions to reopen or reconsider. An alien who has previously filed a motion to reopen or reconsider that is still pending before an immigration judge or the Board, other than a motion for section 212(c) relief, must file a separate special motion to seek section 212(c) relief pursuant to this section. The new motion shall specify any other motions currently pending before an immigration judge or the Board. An alien who has previously filed a motion to reopen under 8 CFR 1003.2 or 1003.23 based on INS v. St. Cyr is not required to file a new special motion under this section, but he or she may supplement the previous motion if it is still pending. Any motion for section 212(c) relief described in this section pending before the Board or an immigration judge on the effective date of this rule that would be barred by the time or number limitations on motions shall be deemed to be a motion filed pursuant to this section, and shall not count against the number restrictions for other motions to reopen.

(2) Motions previously filed pursuant to prior provision. If an alien previously filed a motion to apply for section 212(c) relief with an immigration judge or the Board pursuant to the prior provisions of this section, as in effect before October 28, 2004, and the motion is still pending, the motion will be adjudicated pursuant to the standards of this section, both as revised and as previously in effect, and the alien does not need to file a new special motion pursuant to paragraph (g)(1) of this section. However, if a motion filed under the prior provisions of this section was denied because the alien did not satisfy the requirements contained therein, the alien must file a new special motion pursuant to this section, if eligible, in order to apply for section 212(c) relief based on the requirements established in this section.

(3) Effect of a prior denial of a motion to reopen or motion to reconsider filed after the St. Cyr decision. A motion under this section will not be granted where an alien has previously submitted a motion to reopen or motion to reconsider based on the St. Cyr decision and that motion was denied by an immigration judge or the Board (except on account of time or number limitations for such motions).

(4) Limitations for motions. The filing of a special motion under this section has no effect on the time and number limitations for motions to reopen or reconsider that may be filed on grounds unrelated to section 212(c).

(h) Deadline to file a special motion to seek section 212(c) relief under this section. An alien subject to a final administrative order of deportation or removal must file a special motion to seek section 212(c) relief on or before April 26, 2005. An eligible alien may file one special motion to seek section 212(c) relief under this section.

(i) Fees. No filing fee is required at the time the alien files a special motion to seek section 212(c) relief under this section. However, if the special motion is granted, and the alien has not previously filed an application for section 212(c) relief, the alien will be required to submit the appropriate fee receipt at the time the alien files the Form I-191 with the immigration court.

(j) Remands of appeals. If the Board has jurisdiction and grants the motion to apply for section 212(c) relief pursuant to this section, it shall remand the case to the immigration judge solely for adjudication of the section 212(c) application.

(k) Limitations on eligibility under this section. This section does not apply to:

(1) Aliens who have departed the United States and are currently outside the United States;

(2) Aliens issued a final order of deportation or removal who then illegally returned to the United States; or

(3) Aliens who have not been admitted or paroled.

[69 FR 57833, Sept. 28, 2004]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 97 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2003–2022 · leading case: Cyrus v. Keisler, 505 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cyrus v. Keisler, 505 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2007). · cites it 17× “On April 26, 2005, almost six years after the BIA’s initial- adverse ruling, Cyrus filed a second motion to reopen the removal proceedings pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 , 8 which permits reopening in order to apply for section 212(c) relief, and 8 C.”
Kawashima v. Holder, 615 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 10× “Kawashima argues that his motion to the BIA was a special motion pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 to seek § 212(c) relief.”
Ghassan Mansour v. Alberto Gonzales, United States Attorney Gen., 470 F.3d 1194 (6th Cir. 2006). · cites it 9× “Mansour claims that he pled guilty only after INS officials offered to release him in exchange for his guilty plea. He returned to Michigan and married Vanessa Ramos in 2001.”
Jose Zambrano v. Eric Holder, Jr., 725 F.3d 744 (7th Cir. 2013). · cites it 7× “§ 1231 (a)(5) (barring reopening of removal proceedings); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 (k)(2) (barring discretionary relief from removal).”
Akio Kawashima v. Gonzales, 503 F.3d 997 (9th Cir. 2007). · cites it 5× “Kawashima argues that his motion to the BIA was a special motion pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 to seek section 212(c) relief.”
Jean Fides Alexandre v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 452 F.3d 1204 (11th Cir. 2006). · cites it 3× “Because Alexandre brought only constitutional and legal claims on appeal, it was not error for his habeas petition to be construed as a petition for review and transferred to us by the district court where he filed it.”
Avila-Sanchez v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2007). · cites it 3× “However, on April 20, 2005, Avila had filed with the BIA an unopposed special motion to reopen the First Proceeding— his 1998 removal proceeding — to seek § 1182(c) relief under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . In that motion, Avila failed to advise the BIA that he had been deported…”
An Na Peng v. Holder, 673 F.3d 1248 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 3× “The IJ also cited 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 (b) noting that, due to the repeal of § 212(c), the waiver was not available to aliens who had pleaded not guilty at their criminal proceedings.”
Armendarez, 24 I. & N. Dec. 646 (BIA 2008). · cites it 2× “Motions seeking section 212(c) relief based on that decision are subject to a regulatory filing deadline of April 26, 2005, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 (h) (2006), and cannot be filed at all by aliens who are outside the United States or who have illegally reentered the country after…”
Luna v. Holder, 659 F.3d 753 (9th Cir. 2011). · cites it 3× “3d -, which we dispose of in a separate memorandum disposition filed simultaneously with this opinion, the petitioners seek, inter alia, to reopen their immigration proceedings by raising challenges to, or seeking an exception to, the April 26, 2005, deadline to seek relief…”
Kawashima v. Holder, 593 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 5× “Kawashima argues that his motion to the BIA was a special motion pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 to seek § 212(c) relief.”
Samuel Baraseinde Johnson v. Alberto R. Gonzales, 478 F.3d 795 (7th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “As relevant here, the rule — 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 (h)— provides that an “alien subject to a final administrative order of deportation or removal must file a special motion to seek section 212(c) relief on or before April 26, 2005,” which was 180 days from the October 28, 2004,…”
Show all 97 citing cases →
— 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(a) — 1 case
Carranza-De Salinas v. Gonzales, 477 F.3d 200 (5th Cir. 2007).
— 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(h) — 1 case
Johnson, Samuel B. v. Gonzales, Alberto R. (7th Cir. 2007).
— 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(k)(2) — 1 case
Avila-Sanchez v. Mukasey (9th Cir. 2007).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.