ILNews

Disconnect between immigrants and the law leads to confusion

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

After chatting with a colleague, Marion County Deputy Prosecutor Andrew Fogle decided something needed to be done about the relationship between immigrants and law enforcement.

“There is a great deal of confusion on both sides as to what your rights are, what you can do,” Fogle said.

Fogle and Maria Wildridge, Latino services director for the prosecutor’s office, identified a need for law enforcement and people involved in immigration issues to discuss how to bridge the gap.
 

fogle-andy-mug.jpg Fogle

“Maria and I decided we needed to reach out to the groups and organizations that are working with this population,” Fogle said.

Plans are in development for a one-day seminar in July that will bring together law enforcement, pro bono, and immigrant advocacy representatives in an effort to make sure everyone understands all viewpoints regarding immigrants and their interaction with the legal system.

New laws, new discussions
A new law passed in the Indiana Legislature this spring has resulted in much debate about who is responsible for enforcing its many provisions and how that will be done.

Christie Popp, directing attorney for the Indiana Legal Services Immigrants’ and Language Rights Center in Bloomington, said the new law, Senate Enrolled Act 590, worries many immigrants.

“Even before this legislation was passed, I was getting so many calls from my clients. There was so much concern and misinformation about what was in this law,” she said.

Popp and others say that they know many immigrants are fearful of police. Undocumented immigrants especially worry that interaction with the police – even as a victim or witness – could result in deportation. Indiana’s new law attempts to address that concern, stating that when reporting a crime immigrants do not need to provide proof of their status to police. This subtle revision to the Indiana Code may make immigrants more inclined to come forward when they are witnesses to or victims of violent crime. But no one seems to be able to say specifically how that information will be disseminated to the people who need to know it.

Kerry Hyatt Blomquist, legal director for the Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence, said that getting victims of domestic violence to testify against their accusers can be difficult, especially if victims worry about being deported.

“I can say, ‘Hey your immigration status is not going to be important at this protective hearing,’ but I’ve got to get to them first,” Blomquist said.

Fogle also noted that domestic violence cases involving immigrant victims can be difficult to prosecute.

“You have people arrested on domestic violence, and the victims are afraid to talk to us, they’re afraid they’re going to get deported,” he said. Without cooperation from the victim, the prosecutor’s office may lose a case, which Fogle said is a concern secondary to protecting the victim.

The seeds of distrust
The Pew Hispanic Center reports that of the approximately 322,000 people in Indiana in 2008 who called themselves Hispanic, about 78 percent listed Mexico as their country of origin.

In its 2010 report, “Barriers to justice for immigrants: Distrust of police, language barriers,” Human Rights Watch stated that Mexican laws regarding domestic violence against girls and women are, at best, inadequate. Victims who do report abuse, the report says, often find police treat them with apathy, suspicion, or disrespect. And some abusers may be penalized only after they’ve repeatedly attacked their victims.

So even in the United States, victims may be unsure what to expect from police.

Melissa Arvin, supervising attorney for the Marion County Prosecutor’s Domestic Violence Division, said she thinks that the Hispanic population may also be leery of police based on misconceptions that arise from local interactions. For example, she said that if an immigrant has a negative experience within the court system or with police, word of that experience may spread through the community and contribute to the distrust of police.

A questionable resource
One resource currently available to undocumented victims of certain crimes is the Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status – commonly referred to as the U Visa. The U Visa protects undocumented immigrants from deportation, to encourage their cooperation in prosecuting their attackers. The petition must be certified by a local agency before being submitted to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services office.

“The vast majority of calls we get are immigration cases, and a significant number are people seeking relief because they are victims of violence,” Popp said. “The vast majority of people who seek U Visas are victims of domestic violence, usually perpetrated by a husband or a boyfriend.”

Popp said that generally, she has been successful in getting U Visas certified for those who need them. But she said that in one northern Indiana county, officials refused to certify her client’s U Visa application, even though the client was a rape victim who testified in court, and the offender was prosecuted for the crime.

Agencies eligible to certify U Visa applications include police departments, prosecutor’s offices, the Department of Labor, and others. But agencies are not required by law to sign the I-918 certification form. Furthermore, agencies and attorneys may not agree on the interpretation of the form’s language.

Marco Moreno, an attorney with Indianapolis law firm Lewis & Kappes who specializes in immigration matters, recently attempted to get a U Visa for a man who had been stabbed in the back. Moreno said that he appealed to two attorneys in Indianapolis’ Office of Corporation Counsel, but that his client was denied the U Visa twice on the grounds he would not meet the requirements for being “helpful,” as outlined on the certification form.

Moreno provided Indiana Lawyer with copies of the letters from the city attorneys, which stated that the victim’s testimony was neither credible nor reliable, and therefore, the victim could not be considered “helpful” in solving the crime.

In his appeal of that determination, Moreno wrote a letter specifying, “At all times, Mr. Cortez was cooperative with police and the investigator, going to meetings with authorities, photo line-ups, speaking over the phone with investigators, and providing as much information as possible.” Moreno said his client was able to provide a description of his assailant’s skin and clothing color after being stabbed in the back several times. “This information was provided to the best of his knowledge and recollection while in a position of imminent death,” Moreno wrote.

Moreno said he was unsure what he could now do to help his client. The case was closed, with no arrests made.

“Even though this U Visa is available, in my opinion, it is not being utilized as it is intended to be,” Moreno said.

Arvin, who oversees U Visa applications for her division, said she will not certify a U Visa if there has been no criminal case.

“I don’t feel like I should be signing off if there’s not been some sort of prosecution,” she said. “I’m not saying they’re not cooperative with somebody else,” she added, noting that a victim could also ask the local police to sign the form.

“I wait until the cases are over – I won’t sign off on anything that’s pending,” she added.

Fogle said U Visas are just one of many topics that he hopes will be on the agenda for the seminar he and others are planning.

“Our position from the prosecutor’s office is that we understand this population,” he said, of the growing number of immigrants and refugees. “Our focus is criminal justice and protection of the public, and that very much means protection of victims and witnesses.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT