Rivas v. Villegas

300 A.3d 1036

Maria Estela Villegas RIVAS, Appellant v. Juanna Dayel VILLEGAS and Marvin David Landaverde

No. 2517 EDA 2022

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

Submitted January 30, 2023

Filed July 27, 2023

Ana Ferreira, Philadelphia, for appellant.

Juanna Dayel Villegas, appellee, pro se.

Marvin David Landaverde, appellee, pro se.

BEFORE: BOWES, J., McCAFFERY, J., and SULLIVAN, J.

OPINION BY McCAFFERY, J.:

Maria Estela Villegas Rivas (Grandmother) appeals from the order denying her petition for special relief pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1915.13¹ and its local rule counterpart, Chester County Rule of Civil Procedure 1915.13.A. In the petition, Grandmother sought the issuance of an order containing specific findings of fact regarding her daughter's minor child (Child or the Child), which would permit Child to apply for special immigrant juvenile status (SIJ) under federal law. For the following reasons, we vacate and remand.

I. Facts & Procedural History

Child was born in January 2007 and lived in El Salvador with her mother, Juanna Dayel Villegas (Mother), until November 2021. ² See N.T., 8/19/22, at 16; Grandmother's Complaint For Custody (Custody Complaint), 6/15/22, at 1-2 (unpaginated). It is unclear from the record whether Mother and Child's father, Marvin David Landaverde (Father), were ever married, but they are no longer in a relationship. See N.T. at 10-11. Child also indicated she no longer has communication with Father. Id. at 16.

In November 2021, Child moved to the United States to live with Grandmother and her husband, who presently reside in Chester County, Pennsylvania. See Custody Complaint at 2 (unpaginated). Grandmother paid for Child's travel expenses. See N.T. at 12.

A. Custody Complaint

On June 15, 2022, Grandmother filed a complaint, seeking sole physical and legal custody of Child. See Custody Complaint at 1. ³ That same day, Grandmother also filed a petition for special relief, alleging: (1) Child was under the age of 18 and unmarried; (2) Child had resided with Grandmother for the past six months in the United States; (3) Father is in El Salvador and no longer involved in Child's life; (4) Child had lived with Mother in El Salvador for the past 15 years, but Mother did not have the financial means to support and provide for Child; (5) Grandmother is Child's sole parental figure, and provides for all Child's needs and wants; and (6) Child is eligible for SIJ status, as set forth in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) at 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(27)(J). See Grandmother's Petition for Special Relief Pursuant to Pa.R.C.P. 1915.13 and C.C.R.C.P. 1915.13.A (Grandmother's Petition for Special Relief), 6/15/22, at 1-2 (unpaginated). Grandmother indicated she was "seeking special relief in the form of a [c]ourt [o]rder that enumerates the aforesaid additional findings of fact and grants her sole legal and physical custody of ... Child." Id. at 2.

B. Federal Law — SIJ Statute & Classification

At this juncture, it is necessary to set forth the applicable federal law at issue. "The SIJ statute, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(27)(J), provides that a juvenile who qualifies as an SIJ may apply for lawful permanent residency and thus relief from deportation." Orozco v. Tecu , 284 A.3d 474, 476 (Pa. Super. 2022) (citation omitted). Section 1101(a)(27)(J) defines an SIJ as a juvenile:

(i) who has been declared dependent on a juvenile court located in the United States or whom such a court has legally committed to, or placed under the custody of, an agency or department of a State, or an individual or entity appointed by a State or juvenile court located in the United States, and whose reunification with 1 or both of the immigrant's parents is not viable due to abuse, neglect, abandonment, or a similar basis found under State law[.]

(ii) for whom it has been determined in administrative or judicial proceedings that it would not be in the alien's best interest to be returned to the alien's or parent's previous country of nationality or country of last habitual residence[.]

8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(27)(J). ⁴

"In order to obtain SIJ status, a petitioner must obtain determinations from both the state and federal systems." Orozco , 284 A.3d at 476. Under 8 C.F.R. § 204.11, SIJ classification requires the following, in pertinent part:

(b) Eligibility. A petitioner is eligible for classification as a special immigrant juvenile under section 203(b)(4) of the Act as described at section 1[1]01(a)(27)(J) of the Act, if they meet all of the following requirements:

(1) Is under 21 years of age at the time of filing the petition;

(2) Is unmarried at the time of filing and adjudication;

(3) Is physically present in the United States;

(4) Is the subject of a juvenile court order(s) that meets the requirements under paragraph (c) of this section; and

(5) Obtains consent from the Secretary of Homeland Security to classification as a special immigrant juvenile. For [United States Citizenship Immigration Services (USCIS)] to consent, the request for SIJ classification must be bona fide, which requires the petitioner to establish that a primary reason the required juvenile court determinations were sought was to obtain relief from parental abuse, neglect, abandonment, or a similar basis under State law....

(c) Juvenile court order(s).

(1) Court-ordered dependency or custody and parental reunification determination . The juvenile court must have made certain judicial determinations related to the petitioner's custody or dependency and determined that the petitioner cannot reunify with their parent(s) due to abuse, neglect, abandonment , or a similar basis under State law.

(i) The juvenile court must have made at least one of the following judicial determinations related to the petitioner's custodial placement or dependency in accordance with State law governing such determinations:

(A) Declared the petitioner dependent upon the juvenile court; or

(B) Legally committed to or placed the petitioner under the custody of an agency or department of a State, or an individual or entity appointed by a State or juvenile court.

(ii) The juvenile court must have made a judicial determination that parental reunification with one or both parents is not viable due to abuse, abandonment, neglect, or a similar basis under State law. The court is not required to terminate parental rights to determine that parental reunification is not viable.

(2) Best interest determination.

(i) A determination must be made in judicial or administrative proceedings by a court or agency recognized by the juvenile court and authorized by law to make such decisions that it would not be in the petitioner's best interest to be returned to the petitioner's or their parent's country of nationality or last habitual residence .

(ii) Nothing in this part should be construed as altering the standards for best interest determinations that juvenile court judges routinely apply under relevant State law.

(3) Qualifying juvenile court order(s).

(i) The juvenile court must have exercised its authority over the petitioner as a juvenile and made the requisite judicial determinations in this paragraph under applicable State law to establish eligibility. ...

8 C.F.R. § 204.11(b) - (c) (emphases added). "Under the federal SIJ scheme, the state court does not render an immigration decision but rather makes factual determinations predicate to [United States Citizenship Immigration Services’] SIJ determination." Orozco , 284 A.3d at 477 (citation omitted).

C. Custody Hearing

On August 19, 2022, the trial court held a hearing regarding the custody issue. See N.T. at 3. Grandmother and Child were both present. Id. at 9, 16. Mother and Father did not appear in person or remotely. ⁵ Grandmother's counsel requested the court consider both the custody and petition for special relief issues. See id. at 3-4. The court expressed concern that since the case was a custody matter, it did not qualify as a juvenile or dependency proceeding, and therefore, the court could not review the petition. Id. at 4-5. The court then questioned counsel about whether it had the authority to declare Child dependent and place her in the custody of the Commonwealth, to which Grandmother's counsel answered in the affirmative. Id. at 5-6. Counsel also stated that under the INA, "all we would need is a juvenile court to make [several] predicate findings" with regard to Child's eligibility for the SIJ status. Id. at 6. The court questioned counsel's response, stating:

"[B]ecause I don't have jurisdiction over immigration law, but in looking at federal law regarding an [SIJ status] case, ... it requires that the applicant come before the federal government after obtaining an order of dependency from a state juvenile court." Id. Counsel replied that "a custody order would be sufficient" for SIJ status purposes. Id. at 7. The court then stated, "I'm not sure I'm comfortable with doing that." Id.

Additionally, the trial court pointed out that because Grandmother filed a petition for special relief, that was not the "appropriate" application since Rule 1915.13 concerns "limited temporary orders affecting custody." N.T. at 7. Counsel replied again that Grandmother was requesting the temporary custody findings for the SIJ application, and the court had "jurisdiction to make special findings in the order[.]" Id. at 7-8. The court then stated: "[T]his is a custody matter. Custody matters are decided based upon 16 factors that are set forth by [ 23 Pa.C.S. § 5328(a) ]. If you present a custody case, I will address those 16 factors, but not I am not inclined to grant special relief as I don't believe this qualifies for special relief." Id. at 8. The hearing proceeded to addressing the custody issue. Id. Both Grandmother and Child testified. See id. at 9-18. The court did not enter a decision that day but took the matter under advisement. Id. at 18.

D. Trial Court Orders

On September 7, 2022, the trial court...