Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggrava

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar

How Paek applies the admitted-LPR §212(h) restriction to a person admitted as a conditional permanent resident.

paek-conditional-lpr analysis treats Paek conditional LPR 212(h) aggravated felony as a discrete LPR issue requiring a separate threshold finding.

paek-conditional-lpr preparation should identify the exact status history, travel record, charging theory, and any waiver issue.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 1

Paek treats port-of-entry admission as a conditional permanent resident as an LPR admission for §212(h). paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history.

paek-conditional-lpr briefing should explain 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr argument should distinguish applicant-for-admission status from removability. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence.

paek-conditional-lpr procedural review should frame 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr §212(a) inadmissibility should be distinguished from §237(a) deportability. paek-conditional-lpr analysis should begin with 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr proof should identify the controlling record and legal rule. paek-conditional-lpr evidence should document 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr adverse facts should be confronted rather than omitted. paek-conditional-lpr record analysis should verify 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr unsupported assumptions should be replaced with documentary proof. paek-conditional-lpr status review should evaluate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-1; paek-conditional-lpr the file should show exactly how and when LPR status was acquired.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 2

Conditional residence is not treated as a lesser nonimmigrant status for this question. paek-conditional-lpr factual audit should revisit 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr residence and travel assumptions should be tested against objective records. paek-conditional-lpr closing argument should synthesize 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr pinpoint citations should support each requested finding. paek-conditional-lpr chronology should isolate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr dates should come from primary travel, status, or criminal records. paek-conditional-lpr burden review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr the decision should state which party bears the burden.

paek-conditional-lpr legal framing should define 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr abandonment, inadmissibility, deportability, rescission, and waiver should not be merged. paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history.

paek-conditional-lpr briefing should explain 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr argument should distinguish applicant-for-admission status from removability. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-2; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 3

Removal of conditions does not erase the earlier LPR admission. paek-conditional-lpr analysis should begin with 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr proof should identify the controlling record and legal rule. paek-conditional-lpr evidence should document 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr adverse facts should be confronted rather than omitted. paek-conditional-lpr record analysis should verify 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr unsupported assumptions should be replaced with documentary proof. paek-conditional-lpr status review should evaluate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr the file should show exactly how and when LPR status was acquired.

paek-conditional-lpr source review should confirm 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr current statutes, regulations, BIA precedent, and Supreme Court law should be checked. paek-conditional-lpr factual audit should revisit 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr residence and travel assumptions should be tested against objective records. paek-conditional-lpr closing argument should synthesize 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr pinpoint citations should support each requested finding. paek-conditional-lpr chronology should isolate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr dates should come from primary travel, status, or criminal records. paek-conditional-lpr burden review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr the decision should state which party bears the burden.

paek-conditional-lpr legal framing should define 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr abandonment, inadmissibility, deportability, rescission, and waiver should not be merged. paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-3; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 4

J-H-J- should not be applied mechanically to someone who actually entered as an LPR. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence.

paek-conditional-lpr procedural review should frame 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr §212(a) inadmissibility should be distinguished from §237(a) deportability. paek-conditional-lpr analysis should begin with 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr proof should identify the controlling record and legal rule. paek-conditional-lpr evidence should document 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr adverse facts should be confronted rather than omitted. paek-conditional-lpr record analysis should verify 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr unsupported assumptions should be replaced with documentary proof. paek-conditional-lpr status review should evaluate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr the file should show exactly how and when LPR status was acquired.

paek-conditional-lpr source review should confirm 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr current statutes, regulations, BIA precedent, and Supreme Court law should be checked. paek-conditional-lpr factual audit should revisit 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr residence and travel assumptions should be tested against objective records. paek-conditional-lpr closing argument should synthesize 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr pinpoint citations should support each requested finding. paek-conditional-lpr chronology should isolate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr dates should come from primary travel, status, or criminal records. paek-conditional-lpr burden review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-4; paek-conditional-lpr the decision should state which party bears the burden.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 5

Vella reinforces the continuing significance of any prior LPR admission. paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history.

paek-conditional-lpr briefing should explain 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr argument should distinguish applicant-for-admission status from removability. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence.

paek-conditional-lpr procedural review should frame 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr §212(a) inadmissibility should be distinguished from §237(a) deportability. paek-conditional-lpr analysis should begin with 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr proof should identify the controlling record and legal rule. paek-conditional-lpr evidence should document 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr adverse facts should be confronted rather than omitted. paek-conditional-lpr record analysis should verify 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr unsupported assumptions should be replaced with documentary proof. paek-conditional-lpr status review should evaluate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-5; paek-conditional-lpr the file should show exactly how and when LPR status was acquired.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 6

Paek treats port-of-entry admission as a conditional permanent resident as an LPR admission for §212(h). paek-conditional-lpr factual audit should revisit 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr residence and travel assumptions should be tested against objective records. paek-conditional-lpr closing argument should synthesize 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr pinpoint citations should support each requested finding. paek-conditional-lpr chronology should isolate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr dates should come from primary travel, status, or criminal records. paek-conditional-lpr burden review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr the decision should state which party bears the burden.

paek-conditional-lpr legal framing should define 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr abandonment, inadmissibility, deportability, rescission, and waiver should not be merged. paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history.

paek-conditional-lpr briefing should explain 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr argument should distinguish applicant-for-admission status from removability. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-6; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 7

Conditional residence is not treated as a lesser nonimmigrant status for this question. paek-conditional-lpr analysis should begin with 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr proof should identify the controlling record and legal rule. paek-conditional-lpr evidence should document 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr adverse facts should be confronted rather than omitted. paek-conditional-lpr record analysis should verify 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr unsupported assumptions should be replaced with documentary proof. paek-conditional-lpr status review should evaluate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr the file should show exactly how and when LPR status was acquired.

paek-conditional-lpr source review should confirm 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr current statutes, regulations, BIA precedent, and Supreme Court law should be checked. paek-conditional-lpr factual audit should revisit 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr residence and travel assumptions should be tested against objective records. paek-conditional-lpr closing argument should synthesize 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr pinpoint citations should support each requested finding. paek-conditional-lpr chronology should isolate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr dates should come from primary travel, status, or criminal records. paek-conditional-lpr burden review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr the decision should state which party bears the burden.

paek-conditional-lpr legal framing should define 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr abandonment, inadmissibility, deportability, rescission, and waiver should not be merged. paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-7; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 8

Removal of conditions does not erase the earlier LPR admission. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence.

paek-conditional-lpr procedural review should frame 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr §212(a) inadmissibility should be distinguished from §237(a) deportability. paek-conditional-lpr analysis should begin with 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr proof should identify the controlling record and legal rule. paek-conditional-lpr evidence should document 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr adverse facts should be confronted rather than omitted. paek-conditional-lpr record analysis should verify 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr unsupported assumptions should be replaced with documentary proof. paek-conditional-lpr status review should evaluate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr the file should show exactly how and when LPR status was acquired.

paek-conditional-lpr source review should confirm 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr current statutes, regulations, BIA precedent, and Supreme Court law should be checked. paek-conditional-lpr factual audit should revisit 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr residence and travel assumptions should be tested against objective records. paek-conditional-lpr closing argument should synthesize 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr pinpoint citations should support each requested finding. paek-conditional-lpr chronology should isolate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr dates should come from primary travel, status, or criminal records. paek-conditional-lpr burden review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-8; paek-conditional-lpr the decision should state which party bears the burden.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 9

J-H-J- should not be applied mechanically to someone who actually entered as an LPR. paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history.

paek-conditional-lpr briefing should explain 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr argument should distinguish applicant-for-admission status from removability. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence.

paek-conditional-lpr procedural review should frame 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr §212(a) inadmissibility should be distinguished from §237(a) deportability. paek-conditional-lpr analysis should begin with 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr proof should identify the controlling record and legal rule. paek-conditional-lpr evidence should document 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr adverse facts should be confronted rather than omitted. paek-conditional-lpr record analysis should verify 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr unsupported assumptions should be replaced with documentary proof. paek-conditional-lpr status review should evaluate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-9; paek-conditional-lpr the file should show exactly how and when LPR status was acquired.

Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar: Issue 10

Vella reinforces the continuing significance of any prior LPR admission. paek-conditional-lpr factual audit should revisit 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr residence and travel assumptions should be tested against objective records. paek-conditional-lpr closing argument should synthesize 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr pinpoint citations should support each requested finding. paek-conditional-lpr chronology should isolate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr dates should come from primary travel, status, or criminal records. paek-conditional-lpr burden review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr the decision should state which party bears the burden.

paek-conditional-lpr legal framing should define 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr abandonment, inadmissibility, deportability, rescission, and waiver should not be merged. paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history.

paek-conditional-lpr briefing should explain 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr argument should distinguish applicant-for-admission status from removability. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-issue-10; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence.

Status and Travel Chronology: Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar

paek-conditional-lpr record analysis should verify 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-11; paek-conditional-lpr unsupported assumptions should be replaced with documentary proof. paek-conditional-lpr criminal review should consider 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-11; paek-conditional-lpr offense date, conviction date, statute, disposition, and sentence should be charted. paek-conditional-lpr decision drafting should resolve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-11; paek-conditional-lpr the order should state the factual premise and legal consequence. paek-conditional-lpr closing argument should synthesize 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-11; paek-conditional-lpr pinpoint citations should support each requested finding. paek-conditional-lpr briefing should explain 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-11; paek-conditional-lpr argument should distinguish applicant-for-admission status from removability.

Evidence Plan: Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar

paek-conditional-lpr preservation should record 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-12; paek-conditional-lpr the transcript should contain the argument, response, and ruling. paek-conditional-lpr procedural review should frame 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-12; paek-conditional-lpr §212(a) inadmissibility should be distinguished from §237(a) deportability. paek-conditional-lpr chronology should isolate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-12; paek-conditional-lpr dates should come from primary travel, status, or criminal records. paek-conditional-lpr hearing strategy should develop 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-12; paek-conditional-lpr testimony should focus on facts capable of changing the legal result. paek-conditional-lpr status review should evaluate 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-12; paek-conditional-lpr the file should show exactly how and when LPR status was acquired.

Merits Hearing Strategy: Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar

paek-conditional-lpr analysis should begin with 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-13; paek-conditional-lpr proof should identify the controlling record and legal rule. paek-conditional-lpr burden review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-13; paek-conditional-lpr the decision should state which party bears the burden. paek-conditional-lpr travel review should examine 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-13; paek-conditional-lpr passport, CBP, airline, and permit records should be reconciled. paek-conditional-lpr source review should confirm 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-13; paek-conditional-lpr current statutes, regulations, BIA precedent, and Supreme Court law should be checked. paek-conditional-lpr pleading review should test 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-13; paek-conditional-lpr the NTA should be compared with the theory DHS actually litigates.

Appeal Preservation: Conditional Permanent Residents and the §212(h) Aggravated-Felony Bar

paek-conditional-lpr legal framing should define 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-14; paek-conditional-lpr abandonment, inadmissibility, deportability, rescission, and waiver should not be merged. paek-conditional-lpr waiver analysis should address 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-14; paek-conditional-lpr statutory eligibility should be separated from discretion. paek-conditional-lpr factual audit should revisit 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-14; paek-conditional-lpr residence and travel assumptions should be tested against objective records. paek-conditional-lpr appellate preparation should preserve 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-14; paek-conditional-lpr a reviewing tribunal should not need to reconstruct an incomplete history. paek-conditional-lpr evidence should document 212h-conditional-lpr-paek-practice-14; paek-conditional-lpr adverse facts should be confronted rather than omitted.

Primary Legal Authorities and Sources

Matter of Paek, 26 I&N Dec. 403 (BIA 2014) Conditional LPR admission and §212(h).
Matter of J-H-J-, 26 I&N Dec. 563 (BIA 2015) Adjusted-inside-U.S. rule for §212(h).
Matter of Vella, 27 I&N Dec. 138 (BIA 2017) Prior LPR admission remains relevant under §212(h).
8 U.S.C. §1182 — Inadmissibility and §212(h) Primary inadmissibility and §212(h) statute.
8 C.F.R. §1245.1 — Adjustment of Status Current waiver/adjustment regulation.
8 C.F.R. §1245.2 — IJ Adjustment Jurisdiction Current Immigration Judge adjustment jurisdiction rule.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main rule for Paek conditional LPR 212(h) aggravated felony?

Paek treats port-of-entry admission as a conditional permanent resident as an LPR admission for §212(h).

Who has the burden in a Paek conditional LPR 212(h) aggravated felony dispute?

paek-conditional-lpr burden analysis depends on posture; returning-LPR exception questions use Rivens while inadmissibility, deportability, and relief burdens are separately analyzed.

What records matter most for Paek conditional LPR 212(h) aggravated felony?

paek-conditional-lpr proof should include LPR acquisition records, travel history, CBP records, criminal dispositions when relevant, and waiver or rescission documents.

Does a green card alone resolve Paek conditional LPR 212(h) aggravated felony?

paek-conditional-lpr analysis distinguishes possession of a card from legal questions involving abandonment, lawful acquisition, rescission, inadmissibility, and removability.

Can INA §212(a) apply to Paek conditional LPR 212(h) aggravated felony?

paek-conditional-lpr analysis first asks whether the person is legally treated as seeking admission; returning LPRs receive the statutory §101(a)(13)(C) framework.

How should Paek conditional LPR 212(h) aggravated felony be preserved for appeal?

paek-conditional-lpr preservation should place the status chronology, charging theory, burden argument, evidence, and Immigration Judge findings in the record.