Adames v. INS
Case Date: 07/17/1995
Court: United States Court of Appeals
Docket No: 94-2158
|
July 17, 1995 [NOT FOR PUBICATION] UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT ____________________ No. 94-2158 HECTOR ROLANDO ADAMES, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. ____________________ ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS ____________________ Before Selya, Cyr and Boudin, Circuit Judges. ______________ ____________________ Randy Olen on brief for petitioner. __________ Frank W. Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, and Ellen Sue _________________ __________ Shapiro, Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, _______ United States Department of Justice, on brief for respondent. ____________________ ____________________ Per Curiam. We have carefully reviewed the briefs __________ and the record. We see no basis to disturb the immigration judge's denial of a continuance or the Board's dismissal of petitioner's appeal. In moving for a continuance one month after he had entered an appearance, petitioner's counsel merely asserted that he "suspect[ed] that a post-conviction application would be based on the failure to give Immigration warnings." He did not explain the basis for his suspicion. For example, he did not indicate whether he had reviewed the state court papers, conferred with trial counsel, or even talked with petitioner to determine whether petitioner had been aware of the possibility of deportation when he entered his nolo contendere plea. We need not now decide under what circumstances, if any, an immigration judge should grant a continuance in order to allow a convicted alien to pursue a collateral attack on his conviction. We simply conclude that in view of counsel's meager showing, the immigration judge did not abuse his discretion in denying a continuance in this case. The petition for judicial review is summarily denied. Loc. R. 27.1. |