HAMILTON WINS ASYLUM ON REMAND FOR UGANDAN TORTURE VICTIM

Another of Attorney Hamilton's long term immigration litigation cases came to a successful close with a grant of asylum, on August 18, 2010, before Judge Stancil of the Los Angeles Immigration Court. The case had been ongoing since the mid 90s.

The alien, who had been subjected to torture by Ugandan government authorities, was represented at an initial trial, and then before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) by another firm, who in spite of very vigorous efforts, were unable to convince either tribunal that any humanitarian application on behalf of the alien should be granted. The issue of the alien's identity was heavily contested by the Government during that hearing, and having been unable to satisfy the Court or BIA of his identity, those tribunals felt it unnecessary to fully adjudicate the asylum claim. The alien was also applying for asylum after he had been in the United States for more than one year in conflict with the Immigration & Nationality Act's general requirement that asylum claims be filed within one year of an alien's arrival.

Attorney Hamilton received the case in 2003 to prosecute the alien's 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Petition for Review. The case was argued by Mr. Hamilton before 9th Circuit judges Noonan, Kleinfeld and Berzon, on February 17, 2006. Mr. Hamilton pressed in his briefs and at oral arguments, that the alien's due process had been violated, since said alien was not afforded by the trial judge, a complete opportunity to present his claims, or develop the record with respect to identity. The 9th Circuit agreed, issuing a memorandum granting the petition for review on August 15, 2006. The memorandum remanded the case to the BIA, which in turn remanded the matter to the trial court for retrial. The decision of the 9th Circuit in this case is not considered a "published" decision and thus, does not have the force of binding legal authority in other cases.

The trial in this matter, conducted by Mr. Hamilton in Los Angeles on August 18 was both memorable and rewarding, with the Immigration Judge and Government's counsel exercising compassion and substantial discretion towards the alien. The firm is proud of its part in this outcome and grateful to both the Government and the Court for this most favorable of outcomes.

By: Maria Rangel