Orpinel-Robledo v. Garland, No. 20-2624 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit denied a petition for review of the BIA's decision denying petitioner's application for cancellation of removal. The court concluded that the substitution of immigration judges between the removal hearing and the decision did not violate the text of 8 U.S.C. 1229a(a)(1) nor petitioner's due process rights. The court explained that the phrase "the immigration judge" used in subsequent clauses simply refers to whichever immigration judge is conducting that part of the removal proceedings; the phrase does not require that the first immigration judge oversee the case from initiation to completion. Furthermore, the judge who wrote the decision fully complied with the governing regulations. Finally, petitioner failed to establish a due process right.
Court Description: [Wollman, Author, with Loken and Stras, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. The issuance of the decision by a different immigration judge than conducted the merits hearing did not violate petitioner's due process rights or the text of the applicable statute.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.