Gehi & Associates argued on the record that the previous judge did not sustain the charge because the respondent was only sentenced to 60-day incarceration with ten months on probation. After the judge was done with the preliminary matters, we argued that the charge was not sustained according to the previous attorney who appeared for the master calendar hearing.
The court requested a recess so the government’s attorney can speak to a colleague on what took place at the last hearing. After the break, the DHS attorney confirmed that her colleague at the previous master said that Judge Wilson did not sustain the charge.
However, the current judge stated that since the previous judge did not change his decision on the I-216 that he sustained the charge. Our firm requested that the recording from the last hearing be played in open court to clarify the matter on the record. The immigration judge said those are available to us if we want them, but we needed to continue with the proceedings. Our firm then asked to have it on record that we requested the recordings from the previous matter and that our request was denied.
The Court then began adjudicating the Respondents relief under 212(h). After testimony from the Respondent, his mother, and his brother, the judge ruled in favor of the Respondent and granted the relief under 212(h). We were able to establish extreme hardship to the Respondent and the Respondent’s permanent resident mother. Gehi & Associates were able to get the 212(h) waiver approved and request the release of our client immediately.