Immigration Bonds and Mandatory Detention Law Firm in Tampa

A change in the immigrant’s circumstances, including losing his removal case, may lead to an increase in the bond. Matter of Sugay, 17 I&N Dec. 637 (BIA 1981). As mentioned above, in Jennings, the Supreme Court ruled that the statute does not have an implied 6 months limitation on detention. Immigration and Customs Enforcement may use other forms of incarceration other than physical detention. These alternatives include:

1. Intensive Supervision Appearance Program (ISAP)
2. Enhanced Supervision/ Reporting (ESR)
3. Electronic Monitoring

The Immigration Judge may reconsider non-monitory forms of supervision. Matter of Garcia-Garcia, 25 I&N Dec. 93 (BIA 2009).

Bond Procedure

The District Director with jurisdiction over the immigrant makes the initial determination as to bond. The Director must state the reasons for the decision. Matter of Daryoush, 18 I&N Dec. 352 (BIA 1982). The immigrant must be given access to his or her Alien File. Dent v. Holder, 627 F.3d 365, 371-76 (9th Cir. 2010). After the initial determination by ICE, motions for redetermination should be made to the immigration judge. Matter of P-C-M-, 20 I&N Dec. 432 (BIA 1991). These bond proceedings are separate and apart from removal proceedings. Matter of R-S-H-, 23 I&N Dec. 629, 630 (BIA 2003). As long as the person is in custody, he may make successive motions for redetermination. Matter of Uluocha, 20 I&N Dec. 133 (BIA 1989).

Mandatory Detention

Under 212(d)(2) some individuals are apprehended at the border and found inadmissible does not qualify for a bond but may apply for parole. These individuals include immigrants who are deemed arriving aliens as defined under 8 §§CFR 1.2. This group of individuals includes returning lawful permeant residents who are seeking admission under INA §101(a)(13)(C). As mentioned above, the Supreme Court in Jennings ruled that the statute does not include an implied 6 months limitation on detention.

Mandatory detention also applies to individuals mentioned in INA §236(c). This section of the law applies to the following individuals:

• Persons who are inadmissible by having committed a crime under INA 212(a)(2)
• Persons who are deportable for having committed multiple crimes involving moral turpitude, aggravated felonies, a drug offense, a firearm offense, or treason
• Persons who committed a crime involving moral turpitude with a sentence of more than 1 year
• The Persons involved in terrorist activities

This provision applies to persons who are released after October 9, 1998. Matter of Garcia Arreola, 25 I&N Dec. 267, 269 (BIA 2010). The effective date of INA 236(c) was April 1, 1997.