Additional Cases on Motion to Suppress in Immigration Court

Just some additional notes and cases on motions to suppress in immigration court:

Chun v. Gonzales, No. 04-60904, 2006 WL 14869 (5th Cir. 2006): the Fifth Circuit without analysis said even if evidence obtained through unlawful arrest, suppression not possible, citing Lopez-Mendoza but no analysis.

Leon-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 123 Fed. Appx. 599 (5th Cir. 2005) (unpublished): motion to suppress denied because the border patrol agents did have the requisite reasonable suspicion to make an automobile stop.

Mosqueda-Araujo v. Gonzales, 135 Fed. Appx. 87 (9th Cir. 2005) (unpublished): motion to suppress loses where the respondent admitted alienage.

Miguel v. INS, 359 F.3d 408 (6th Cir. 2004): motion to suppress loses where the respondent admitted alienage.

Salgado-Diaz v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1158 (9th Cir. 2005): motion to suppress will succeed to suppress post-deportation activity if respondent can prove the government violated his rights in deporting him in the first place. Based on equitable estoppel principles.

Mejorada v. Ashcroft, 103 Fed. Appx. 263 (9th Cir. 2004) (unpublished): motion to suppress loses where government had independent physical evidence of alienage.

Garcia-Recendiz v. INS, 68 Fed. Appx. 10 (9th Cir. 2003) (unpublished): motion to suppress denied because the respondent filed an affidavit of fact with her motion to suppress that mentioned she was born abroad. I guess do not file any affidavits of fact with motions to suppress that discuss alienage.