NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 20a0154n.06 No. 19-3518 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT FILED Mar 13, 2020 EDITH ESPINAL MORENO, ) DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ON PETITION FOR REVIEW ) FROM THE BOARD OF WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, ) IMMIGRATION APPEALS ) Respondent. ) Before: BOGGS, CLAY, and GIBBONS, Circuit Judges. JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. Edith Espinal Moreno seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision denying her motion to reconsider or reopen her removal proceedings. Moreno argues that reconsideration is warranted because her Notice to Appear (“NTA”) did not specify the date or time of her hearing and therefore did not confer jurisdiction over her removal proceedings to the immigration courts. Because we have held that an NTA without a date and time for a hearing does not divest an immigration judge of jurisdiction, the BIA correctly denied the motion to reconsider. Moreno also argues that the BIA erred in denying her motion to reopen. The basis of that motion is her allegation that she received ineffective assistance of counsel by the attorney who first represented her, Brian Hoffman. But because Moreno’s subsequent counsel allowed the deadline for filing a motion to reopen to lapse and delayed filing even after gathering additional evidence, the BIA correctly determined that the motion to reopen was untimely. Accordingly, we deny Moreno’s petition. No. 19-3518, Espinal Moreno v. Barr I. Moreno previously appeared before this court seeking review of the BIA’s October 28, 2016 decision affirming the denial of asylum and other relief from deportation. Moreno v. Sessions, 694 F. App’x 391 (6th Cir. 2017). She argued that the immigration judge’s adverse credibility determination was not supported by substantial evidence. Id. at 392, 396–97. The immigration judge based the adverse credibility finding on Moreno’s omission of several critical details from her asylum application, including her prior sexual assault. Id. at 396–97. We held that those omissions supported the adverse credibility finding and denied her petition on July 21, 2017. Id. at 398. Cynthia Bedrosian of Muchnicki & Bittner, LLP represented Moreno before this court, id. at 392, but she was not Moreno’s original counsel. Moreno was represented by Brian Hoffman— also of Muchnicki & Bittner, LLP—in her proceedings before the immigration judge and BIA. In October 2016, while Moreno’s appeal was pending before the BIA, Hoffman informed Moreno that he was leaving his firm and could no longer represent her. When the BIA denied Moreno’s appeal, Hoffman recommended she speak with Bedrosian. Bedrosian began representing Moreno in October 2016. Under Bedrosian’s representation, the ninety-day period for filing a motion to reopen with the BIA lapsed. Sometime after we denied her petition, Moreno changed counsel again, parting with Bedrosian for her current counsel, Lizabeth Mateo Jimenez. In December 2017, Moreno voluntarily underwent a psychological evaluation, which revealed symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder stemming in part from her prior sexual assault. Around that same time, Moreno’s ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals