The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XLVIII
EARLY LEARNING-20 EDUCATION CODE

Chapter 1003
PUBLIC K-12 EDUCATION

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 1003.44

1003.44 Patriotic programs; rules.—

(1) Each district school board may adopt rules to require, in all of the schools of the district, programs of a patriotic nature to encourage greater respect for the government of the United States and its national anthem and flag, subject always to other existing pertinent laws of the United States or of the state. When the national anthem is played, students and all civilians shall stand at attention, men removing the headdress, except when such headdress is worn for religious purposes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag, “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all,” shall be rendered by students standing with the right hand over the heart. The pledge of allegiance to the flag shall be recited at the beginning of the day in each public elementary, middle, and high school in the state. Each student shall be informed by a written notice published in the student handbook or a similar publication pursuant to s. 1006.07(2) that the student has the right not to participate in reciting the pledge. Upon written request by his or her parent, the student must be excused from reciting the pledge, including standing and placing the right hand over his or her heart. When the pledge is given, unexcused students must show full respect to the flag by standing at attention, men removing the headdress, except when such headdress is worn for religious purposes, as provided by Pub. L. ch. 77-435, s. 7, approved June 22, 1942, 56 Stat. 377, as amended by Pub. L. ch. 77-806, 56 Stat. 1074, approved December 22, 1942.

(2) Each district school board may allow any teacher or administrator to read, or to post in a public school building or classroom or at any school-related event, any excerpt or portion of the following historic material: the national motto; the national anthem; the pledge of allegiance; the Constitution of the State of Florida, including the Preamble; the Constitution of the United States, including the Preamble; the Bill of Rights; the Declaration of Independence; the Mayflower Compact; the Emancipation Proclamation; the writings, speeches, documents, and proclamations of the presidents of the United States, the signers of the Constitution of the United States and the Declaration of Independence, and civil rights leaders; and decisions of the United States Supreme Court. However, any material that is read, posted, or taught pursuant to this provision may be presented only from a historical perspective and in a nonproselytizing manner. When less than an entire document is used, the excerpt or portion must include as much material as is reasonably necessary to reflect the sentiment of the entire document and avoid expressing statements out of the context in which they were originally made. If the material refers to laws or judicial decisions that have been superseded, the material must be accompanied by a statement indicating that such law or decision is no longer the law of the land. No material shall be selected to advance a particular religious, political, or sectarian purpose. The department shall distribute a copy of this section to each district school board, whereupon each district school superintendent shall distribute a copy to all teachers and administrators.

(3) All public schools in the state are encouraged to coordinate, at all grade levels, instruction related to our nation’s founding fathers with “American Founders’ Month” pursuant to s. 683.1455.

(4) Each district school board shall adopt rules to require, in all of the schools of the district and in each building used by the district school board, the display of the state motto, “In God We Trust,” designated under s. 15.0301, in a conspicuous place.

(5) The hours that a high school student devotes to the Florida Debate Initiative, also known as the Central Florida Debate Initiative, the YMCA Youth and Government program, the American Legion Boys State program, the American Legion Girls State program, or other similar programs approved by the commissioner shall count towards the service work requirement for the Florida Bright Futures Scholarship Program.

(6) To help families, civic institutions, local communities, district school boards, and charter schools prepare students to be civically responsible and knowledgeable adults, the Department of Education shall:

(a) Develop or approve an integrated civic education curriculum that school districts and charter schools must incorporate as part of regular school work in kindergarten through grade 12. The civic education curriculum must assist students in developing:

1. An understanding of their shared rights and responsibilities as residents of the state and of the founding principles of the United States as described in s. 1003.42(2)(a)-(c).

2. A sense of civic pride and desire to participate regularly with government at the local, state, and federal levels.

3. An understanding of the process for effectively advocating before government bodies and officials.

4. An understanding of the civic-minded expectations, developed by the State Board of Education, of an upright and desirable citizenry that recognizes and accepts responsibility for preserving and defending the blessings of liberty inherited from prior generations and secured by the United States Constitution.

(b) Curate oral history resources to be used along with the civic education curriculum which provide portraits in patriotism based on the personal stories of diverse individuals who demonstrate civic-minded qualities, including first-person accounts of victims of other nations’ governing philosophies who can compare those philosophies with those of the United States. This paragraph may be cited as the “Portraits in Patriotism Act.”

(c) Approve integrated civic education curricula submitted by school districts and charter schools that meet the requirements of this subsection.

History.—s. 137, ch. 2002-387; s. 39, ch. 2016-237; s. 17, ch. 2017-116; s. 22, ch. 2018-6; s. 2, ch. 2019-150; s. 2, ch. 2021-158.

F.S. 1003.44 on Google Scholar

F.S. 1003.44 on Casetext

Amendments to 1003.44

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 1003.44

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 1003.44.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

UNITED STATES v. ARROYO,, 356 F. Supp. 3d 619 (W.D. Tex. 2018)

. . . . § 1003.44(f) ("An eligible alien shall file ... with the immigration judge or the Board, whichever . . .

TURKHAN, v. E. LYNCH,, 836 F.3d 843 (7th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 1003.44 (2004). . . .

UNITED STATES v. GILL,, 748 F.3d 491 (2d Cir. 2014)

. . . Second, the BIA found that “in any event, [under 8 CFR § 1003.44(h) ] a special motion seeking relief . . . He appealed and the BIA reversed that deportation order as well. . 8 CFR § 1003.44(h) sets forth procedures . . .

PEREZ- MORALES, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 554 F. App'x 653 (9th Cir. 2014)

. . . . § 1003.44(h). Perez-Morales filed his motion in November 2009. . . . alien deportable or removable, pursuant to a plea agreement made before April 1, 1997.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . .

M. ZAMBRANO- REYES, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 725 F.3d 744 (7th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 1003.44(k)(2) (barring discretionary relief from removal). I. . . . See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(5); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(k)(2). . . . Cyr. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44. . . . . § 1003.44(k)(2). . . . The Board cited section 1003.44(k)(2) for this proposition. . . .

ROBLES, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 504 F. App'x 623 (9th Cir. 2013)

. . . . § 1003.44(h) (the deadline to file a special motion to seek section 212(c) relief is April 26, 2005 . . .

AN NA PENG, v. H. HOLDER Jr., 673 F.3d 1248 (9th Cir. 2012)

. . . . § 1003.44(b) noting that, due to the repeal of § 212(c), the waiver was not available to aliens who . . . The BIA also noted that 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(b) limited relief to aliens who entered a plea agreement. . . . We note that the BIA also cited 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 in affirming the denial of a continuance. . . . Section 1003.44 provides for a special motion to seek § 212(c) relief for aliens who pleaded guilty or . . . Id. § 1003.44(a). . . . .

LUNA, v. H. HOLDER Jr., 659 F.3d 753 (9th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 1003.44 (“Special motion to seek section 212(c) relief for aliens who pleaded guilty or nolo contendere . . . We hold that § 1003.44’s deadline to file special motions to reopen is a constitutionally-sound procedural . . . See id.; 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(h). . . . Second, even assuming that Tapia has not waived his challenge to the constitutionality of § 1003.44, . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(h). . . .

RODRIGUEZ- SANCHEZ, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 450 F. App'x 617 (9th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 1003.44. Rodriguez raises two grounds for error: one explicitly, the other implicitly. . . . He contends that the April 26, 2005, deadline for filing special motions to reopen set forth in § 1003.44 . . . As we set forth in our opinion in Tapia-Luna, we conclude that § 1003.44 is a constitutionally and procedurally . . .

KANDOLA, a. k. a. v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 446 F. App'x 853 (9th Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 1003.44(h). We need not reach Kandola’s remaining contentions in light of our disposition. . . .

BASILIO, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UNITED STATES,, 439 F. App'x 146 (3d Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 1003.44 (2009). . . . .

VASILARAKIS, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UNITED STATES,, 435 F. App'x 152 (3d Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 1003.44(b)(2). . . .

TAVAREZ, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 422 F. App'x 19 (2d Cir. 2011)

. . . . § 1003.44(h) (reopening period ended on April 26, 2005); (2) did not raise a colorable ineffective . . .

PHI QUOC TRAN, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 424 F. App'x 626 (9th Cir. 2011)

. . . . §§ 1003.44(a), 1212.3(f)(5). . . .

BUCIO- CARRILLO, v. H. HOLDER Jr., 406 F. App'x 211 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44, because it specifically excludes aliens who illegally return to the United States. 2. . . .

BARRAZA, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 402 F. App'x 320 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44(k)(2) (individuals issued a final order of deportation who then illegally return to the United . . .

PONCE- RODRIGUEZ, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 400 F. App'x 310 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44(k)(2). See Avila-Sanchez, 509 F.3d at 1040-41. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. . . .

JUAREZ- MENDEZ, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 399 F. App'x 173 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44(d), (k); see also Avila-Sanchez, 509 F.3d at 1040-41 (9th Cir.2007). . . .

THAN MIN, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 397 F. App'x 325 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44(b)(2), and because his crime of violence aggravated felony ground of re-movability lacks . . .

BORBON- VARGAS, v. H. HOLDER, Jr. U. S., 391 F. App'x 916 (2d Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44 (authorizing the filing of special motions to reopen by “certain aliens who formerly were . . . 2004 (the regulation’s effective date, see 69 Fed.Reg. 57826-01), and April 26, 2005, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . . Here, it is undisputed that petitioner’s section 1003.44 motion to reopen was untimely, as it was filed . . . In order to demonstrate that his attorney was ineffective in failing to file a special section 1003.44 . . . was no basis for the BIA to toll the relevant time period for petitioner to file a special section 1003.44 . . .

DEBEATHAM, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 602 F.3d 481 (2d Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44 (codifying the holding of St. Cyr). . . .

GUZMAN- CANO, a k a v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UNITED STATES,, 373 F. App'x 209 (3d Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44. . . .

Dr. A. NEWDOW v. RIO LINDA UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT, Dr. M. Dr. S. J., 597 F.3d 1007 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44 (West 2009); Ga.Code Ann. § 20-2-310 (2005); Idaho Code Ann. § 33-1602 (2008); 105 ILL. . . .

NGHI XUAN TRAN, v. H. HOLDER Jr., 366 F. App'x 796 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44(d). See Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 792 (9th Cir.2005). . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(d) (“A motion under this section will not be granted with respect to any conviction . . .

KAWASHIMA v. H. HOLDER, Jr. v. H. Jr., 593 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 1003.44 to seek § 212(c) relief. . . . Id. § 1003.44(h). Furthermore, the provision imposes strict procedural requirements. . . . . § 1003.44(f) (emphasis added). Mr. . . . Kawashima’s failure to include the precise language required by § 1003.44(h) is a sufficient basis on . . . Section 1003.44 does not require mere notice, it imposes strict procedural requirements to qualify for . . .

RAMIREZ MATA, v. H. HOLDER Jr., 360 F. App'x 936 (9th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(e) (“Proceedings shall be reopened under this section solely for adjudicating . . .

ROMUALDO, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 357 F. App'x 933 (9th Cir. 2009)

. . . . §§ 1003.2(c)(2) & 1003.44(h), and the record does not establish that equitable tolling was warranted . . .

CHAVEZ, v. H. HOLDER Jr., 356 F. App'x 77 (9th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44. For the reasons stated below, we affirm the BIA’s denial of Chavez’s motion to reopen. . . . In 2005, Chavez filed a motion to reopen his case with the BIA pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44. . . . Section 1003.44 allows an alien to file special motion for relief under former section 212(c) of the . . . section 212(c) relief but-for a conviction obtained by plea agreement prior to April 1, 1997. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . .

UNITED STATES v. CLINTON,, 653 F. Supp. 2d 446 (S.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44(k). Defendant was ordered to surrender on October 27, 1999, but failed to do so. . . . generated more than two years after the BIA denied his appeal by reopening his case pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . . exhaustion prong of Section 1326(d) did require Defendant to bring a motion to reopen pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . . Defendant that statutory relief was unavailable, his failure to move to reopen the case pursuant to section 1003.44 . . .

DE LA ROSA, v. U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,, 579 F.3d 1327 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44). . . .

OSEI, v. H. HOLDER, Jr. U. S., 338 F. App'x 423 (5th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44(b)(4). . . . Despite its citation to § 1003.44(b) in its order, the BIA erred by considering the date Osei’s plea . . .

D ALESSANDRO, v. B. MUKASEY,, 628 F. Supp. 2d 368 (W.D.N.Y. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44 (2007); the deadline for special motions was 4/26/2005, and petitioner filed his motion on . . .

Ke LI, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 330 F. App'x 243 (2d Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44(h). . . .

v., 132 T.C. 131 (T.C. 2009)

. . . Section 1003.44(h) [the regulation setting the deadline] is similar to time limits imposed in the Federal . . .

FERGUSON, v. U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,, 563 F.3d 1254 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44(a) we also stated that “§ 212(c) relief is not available to aliens who were convicted after . . . We further mentioned that "[ejven without the five-year bar, the plain language of § 1003.44 also precludes . . .

VASQUEZ- BARRON, v. H. Jr. U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,, 314 F. App'x 738 (5th Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44(h). The petition for review is DENIED. Pursuant to 5th Cir. . . .

NADAL- GINARD, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 558 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2009)

. . . . § 1003.44(a). . . . .

FRAZIER, v. ALEXANDRE, F. T., 555 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. 2009)

. . . The pertinent part of Florida Statute § 1003.44(1) reads: The pledge of allegiance to the flag ... shall . . .

CASTILLO- PERALES, v. B. MUKASEY, U. S., 298 F. App'x 366 (5th Cir. 2008)

. . . . §§ 1003.23(b)(1), 1003.44(k)(l), and 1003.2(d), the BIA determined that the immigration judge correctly . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44. . . . . § 1003.44(k)(l). . . . Because Castillo departed and is currently outside the United States, § 1003.44(k)(l) bars his request . . .

GUZMAN- GUZMAN, v. B. MUKASEY,, 286 F. App'x 524 (9th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 1003.44(k) (individuals issued a final order of deportation who then illegally return to the United . . .

FRAZIER, FRAZIER, v. WINN, In F. In T. In, 535 F.3d 1279 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . PER CURIAM: This case involves Florida's Pledge of Allegiance statute, section 1003.44(1), Florida Statutes . . . Stat. § 1003.44(1) (emphasis added). . . . Plaintiff contended that section 1003.44(1) is facially invalid because it requires that a student obtain . . . Stat. § 1003.44(1). . . . Stat. § 1003.44(1). The statute permits students an exception to this requirement, however. . . .

NAGHDI, v. B. MUKASEY, U. S., 275 F. App'x 350 (5th Cir. 2008)

. . . Section 1003.44 permits aliens who meet certain requirements to seek relief from removal under the former . . . section 212(c) relief by an immigration judge or by the Board on discretionary grounds.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . . , because the BIA did not rule on the issue, there is no final ruling that would bar relief under § 1003.44 . . . IJ previously denied Naghdi § 212(c) relief in the exercise of his discretion and that, therefore, § 1003.44 . . .

AMOROSO, v. GONZALES,, 270 F. App'x 229 (3d Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 1003.44(h) for special motions to seek § 212(c) relief for aliens subject to final orders of deportation . . . The rule — 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(h) — provides that “[a]n alien subject to a final administrative order . . . We reject Amoroso's argument because § 1003.44(h) afforded aliens like Amoroso a sufficient window to . . . Gonzales, 478 F.3d 795 (7th Cir.2007) (upholding the BIA’s adherence to the deadline in 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . .

ARCE- VALDEZ, v. B. MUKASEY,, 271 F. App'x 620 (9th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 1003.44(k)(2). See id. at 1041. We need not reach Arce-Valdez’s remaining contentions. . . .

VALENZUELA- SANCHEZ, v. B. MUKASEY,, 271 F. App'x 604 (9th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 1003.44(k)(2). See id. at 1041. We need not reach Valenzuela-Sanchez’s remaining contentions. . . .

IBANEZ, v. U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,, 270 F. App'x 816 (11th Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 1003.44. . . . Id. at §§ 1003.44(c), 1212.3(f)(4)(i)-(ii). In Alexandre v. U.S. . . .

GREENIDGE- STEVENS, v. B. MUKASEY,, 263 F. App'x 166 (2d Cir. 2008)

. . . . § 1003.44, to seek relief from deportation under section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality . . .

AVILA- SANCHEZ, v. B. MUKASEY,, 509 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44. . . . See 8 C.F.R. 1003.44(k)(2). . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(a)-(e). . . . Id. § 1003.44(k)(2). . . . The provisions of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(k)(2) are constitutional and were not improperly applied to Avila . . .

ABIMBOLA, v. B. MUKASEY, U. S., 256 F. App'x 667 (5th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44(a), (c). . . . In conformity with 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(g)(4), the BIA rejected on the merits Abimbola’s argument that . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. B. MUKASEY,, 256 F. App'x 964 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44(b)-(c); 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1996). We deny the petition. Rodriguez cannot prevail. . . .

CYRUS, v. D. KEISLER,, 505 F.3d 197 (2d Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44, which permits reopening in order to apply for section 212(c) relief, and 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 . . . The Government further contends that Cyrus could not move to reopen under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 for any . . . First, we hold that, as a matter of law, reopening on the basis of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 is not available . . . is not available to a petitioner ineligible for section 212(c) relief because 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 by . . . In response, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(e) was proposed in order to “codify the Supreme Court’s holding” and . . .

ARIAS- GOMEZ, a k a v. D. KEISLER,, 250 F. App'x 368 (2d Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44”; (2) it was obligated to use its authority to grant his motion sua sponte given that he . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(f). . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(e). . . . . § 1003.44, which does. First, Arias did not pursue this argument with the BIA. . . . Section 1003.44 was adopted after St. . . .

AKIO KAWASHIMA v. R. GONZALES, v. R., 503 F.3d 997 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44 to seek section 212(c) relief. . . . Id. § 1003.44(h). Furthermore, the provision imposes strict procedural requirements. . . . Id. § 1003.44(f) (emphasis added). Mr. . . . Kawashima’s failure to include the precise language required by § 1003.44(h) is a sufficient basis on . . . Section 1003.44 does not require mere notice, it imposes strict procedural requirements to qualify for . . .

KAWASHIMA v. H. HOLDER Jr. v. H. Jr., 615 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2007)

CESPEDES- AQUINO, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UNITED STATES,, 498 F.3d 221 (3d Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44; 8 C.F.R. § 1212.3. . Hernandez v. . . .

LEE, v. U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,, 242 F. App'x 637 (11th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44. Accordingly, we DENY the petition in part and DISMISS it in part. I. . . . Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(k), there is an alternative form of relief in the form of a motion to . . . final order of deportation or removal who then illegally returned to the United States.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . . Under § 1003.44(k), this form of relief is not available to aliens who return to this country illegally . . . As determined by the BIA, he was ineligible for relief based on his illegal reentry. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . .

MORENO- MESA, v. R. GONZALES,, 234 F. App'x 661 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44(a)(4); see also Alvarez-Barajas v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 1050, 1053-54 (9th Cir.2005). . . .

DALOMBO FONTES, v. R. GONZALES,, 483 F.3d 115 (1st Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44, which addresses section 212(c) relief for aliens with convictions predating April 1, 1997 . . . Therefore, he is ineligible for reopening under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44. . . .

JOHNSON, v. R. GONZALES,, 478 F.3d 795 (7th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44(h)— provides that an “alien subject to a final administrative order of deportation or removal . . . Johnson argues that § 1003.44(h) has an impermissible retroactive effect. . . . But does 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(h) fall within bounds? Is it procedural or substantive? . . . That is essentially what Johnson says § 1003.44(h) does. . . . Section 1003.44(h) is similar to time limits imposed in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Appellate . . .

NGHI XUAN TRAN, v. R. GONZALES,, 221 F. App'x 681 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44(h) (establishing an April 26, 2005 deadline for such motions). . . . . § 1003.44 was an abuse of discretion and we remand for further proceedings. See Mohammed v. . . .

CAROLEO, v. R. GONZALES,, 476 F.3d 158 (3d Cir. 2007)

. . . . § 1003.44, 1212.3(f)(5) (effective Oct. 28, 2004). . . .

CARRANZA- DE SALINAS, v. GONZALES, U. S., 477 F.3d 200 (5th Cir. 2007)

. . . BIA declined to address this argument in any fashion, finding itself bound by the limits of 8 C.F.R § 1003.44 . . .

MANSOUR, v. GONZALES,, 470 F.3d 1194 (6th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44, which allows eligible aliens who pled guilty or nolo contendere to certain crimes before . . . Section 1003.44, then, effectively codified the Court’s holding in St. Cyr. See Lawrence v. . . . Mansour, however, sought to reopen as an alien eligible for special relief under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44. . . . Application of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(k)(2) As set forth above, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(k) excludes three categories . . . Section 1003.44(k)(2), which excludes from eligibility for § 212(c) relief those aliens who are under . . .

SEGOVIA- PLATA, v. R. GONZALES, U. S., 205 F. App'x 304 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44(b) is unavailing because Segovia was convicted of an aggravated felony, as that term was . . . 415 F.3d 436, 447 (5th Cir.2005), petition for cert. filed (Dec. 22, 2005) (No. 05-830); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . .

WILSON, v. R. GONZALES, U. S., 201 F. App'x 968 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44. . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(g)(3). In any event, Wilson’s St. Cyr claim was meritless. . . .

MARSAN, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UNITED STATES, 199 F. App'x 159 (3d Cir. 2006)

. . . . §§ 1003.44 & 1212.3. . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(d); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(k)(2) (specifically providing that special motions . . .

MUNOZ- SIGALA, v. J. MOORE, R. v. R., 197 F. App'x 363 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44(b). . . .

DE ARAUJO, v. R. GONZ LES,, 457 F.3d 146 (1st Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44, which allows eligible aliens to file a special motion seeking relief under former section . . . The BIA denied this motion pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(d), which states that aliens previously denied . . .

YUK CHAN, v. R. GONZALES, U. S., 193 F. App'x 320 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44, which now allows aliens who meet certain requirement to seek relief from removal under the . . . demonstrate the required lawful permanent resident status to be eligible for relief under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . . he was a “lawful” permanent resident, which was required for eligibility for relief under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . .

TECAT, v. R. GONZALES, U. S., 188 F. App'x 308 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44, which provides for special motions to seek INA § 212(c) relief for certain aliens, violates . . . The Ninth Circuit therefore concluded that 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44, which permits aliens who were in deportation . . .

FRAZIER, v. ALEXANDRE,, 434 F. Supp. 2d 1350 (S.D. Fla. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44(1), has a policy mandating that students, unless excused by written request of a parent, . . . Stat. § 1003.44(1). Frazier’s injury will be redressed by a favorable decision by this Court. . . . Stat. § 1003.44(1). Nor is the State Defendants’ reading of the statute entitled to deference. . . . Stat. § 1003.44(1). . . . The State Defendants cite no agency decision or rule construing § 1003.44(1). . . .

RUBIO, v. U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,, 182 F. App'x 925 (11th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44, to reopen his removal proceedings to seek relief under former INA § 212(c), 8 U.S.C. § 1182 . . .

HAMILTON, v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF UNITED STATES, 183 F. App'x 196 (3d Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44(c), that because Hamilton had been convicted of an aggravated felony, he was ineligible for . . .

AVENDANO- ESPEJO, v. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY,, 448 F.3d 503 (2d Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44. . . .

LAWRENCE, v. R. GONZALES,, 446 F.3d 221 (1st Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44(b)(2) (2006). . . . the alien must have pled guilty “pursuant to a plea agreement made before April 1, 1997.” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . .

ALEXANDRE, v. U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,, 452 F.3d 1204 (11th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44(f) (noting that an alien filing a motion under this section must submit “supporting documents . . . the standard of review applicable to a denial of a motion to reopen brought pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . . ) relief is not available to aliens who were convicted after a trial instead of on a guilty plea. § 1003.44 . . . Even without the five-year bar, the plain language of § 1003.44 also precludes those who did not plead . . . See § 1003.44(a); § 1212.3(f)(4)(h); Brooks, 283 F.3d at 1274. PETITION DENIED. . . . .

GUERRA- MOYA, v. A. G. WINFREY, R. U. S., 170 F. App'x 358 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44(b)(3). . . .

UNITED STATES v. LUNA,, 436 F.3d 312 (1st Cir. 2006)

. . . . § 1003.44. . . . See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44(k). C. . . .

JIMENEZ- AGUILAR, v. R. GONZALES, U. S., 168 F. App'x 552 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . . §§ 1003.44(b)(2) and 1212.3(h) (2004), which were amended and revised after the IJ’s decision, Petitioner . . .

MARTINEZ- JARACUARO, v. GONZALES,, 128 F. App'x 25 (9th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 1003.44(c) & (k)(1). PETITION DISMISSED. . . .

TRUJILLO- GARCIA, v. R. GONZALES,, 125 F. App'x 229 (10th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 1003.44. . . .

ALVAREZ- HERNANDEZ, v. M. ACOSTA, U. S., 401 F.3d 327 (5th Cir. 2005)

. . . . § 1003.44(b)(l)-(4) (2004) (emphasis added). . 69 Fed.Reg. 57,826, 57,831 (Sept. 28, 2004). . Id. . . . agreement and went to trial did so in reliance upon the availability of § 212(c) relief). . 8 C.F.R. § 1003.44 . . .

TRINH, v. ASHCROFT,, 112 F. App'x 626 (9th Cir. 2004)

. . . . § 1003.44). . . .

ROBLEDO- GONZALES, v. D. ASHCROFT,, 342 F.3d 667 (7th Cir. 2003)

. . . . § 1003.44; for the sake of consistency, we use the former designation throughout this opinion. . . . .