CA2: In removal proceedings, pet’rs made a prima facie case of egregious 4A violation; remanded

“In removal proceedings before the IJ, both petitioners moved to suppress the evidence obtained during the search, arguing that the search violated the Fourth Amendment because it was conducted without a warrant, consent, or exigent circumstances, and, even assuming the existence of a warrant, the search exceeded its scope. Although petitioners submitted affidavits in support of their motion, the IJ denied the motion, without holding a suppression hearing. The question presented is whether the IJ should have held an evidentiary hearing in light of the evidence submitted by petitioners. We hold that because petitioners made a sufficient showing of an egregious constitutional violation, they were entitled to a suppression hearing.” NYSP came to the house with a purported felony warrant for a fugitive, but ICE came along for “translation assistance” knowing that there were “migrants” inside, and they banged on the windows and doors at 10 pm when all the occupants were asleep. One person let them in testifying that he felt he had no choice. The occupants made a prima facie showing of an egregious constitutional violation. Zuniga-Perez v. Sessions, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 20645 (2d Cir. July 25, 2018).

This entry was posted in Exclusionary rule, Immigration arrests. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.