9th Cir.

Haracic v. Blanche

June 16, 2026 ·25-3076 ·Unpublished · By Aisha Johnson

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review challenging a Board of Immigration Appeals order that rejected a motion to reopen removal proceedings. The court found the petitioners failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel or prejudice from the alleged deficiencies.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:50

Background

The petitioners, Safet Haracic, Zekija Haracic, and Muharem Haracic, sought review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying their motion to reopen. They asserted ineffective assistance of counsel in their removal proceedings, claiming their attorney failed to present evidence regarding their asylum eligibility and country conditions.

The court’s reasoning

The court reviewed the denial for abuse of discretion. It found that the petitioners could not establish deficient performance because the facts they alleged counsel omitted were already part of the record. Regarding prejudice, the court held the Board correctly required a plausible claim for relief. The court also affirmed the Board’s reliance on country conditions reports combined with an individualized determination. Finally, the court noted that the argument regarding humanitarian asylum was unexhausted because it was not raised in the motion to reopen.

What it means going forward

The petition for review is denied, and the temporary stay of removal is lifted, allowing removal proceedings to proceed.