Limones v. Holder
**Due process, hardship**
The IJ did not violate due process because he fully credited Ms. Delgado’s testimony as well as the documentary medical evidence regarding her daughter’s health. Petitioners have made no showing that their daughter’s testimony would have been noncumulative. In addition, Petitioners fail to present a colorable claim that the immigration judge violated due process because the immigration judge’s hardship analysis on Ms. Delgado’s application was tainted by the judge’s erroneous conclusion that Mr Limones had committed a crime of moral turpitude. Petitioners have made no showing that the IJ’s error affected the judge’s hardship analysis, and any error was harmless in light of the Board’s independent and untainted review of the hardship issue as applied to both petitioners.
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/memoranda/2010/03/26/07-71952.pdf
newimmigrationcases
