Swede Loses Final Plea to Stay in U.S.

Bertil Sagermark, a Swedish citizen who for 11 years used every legal avenue available to postpone his deportation from the United States, ran out of appeals Monday when a U.S. District Court judge denied two recent petitions, clearing the way for Sagermark’s deportation.

After the hearing, Sagermark, 67, kissed his Guatemalan wife and two U.S.-born sons goodby and was taken into custody by Immigration and Naturalization Service officials. INS attorney Charles Hamilton said that Sagermark, who has persistently claimed that he would be jailed as a mental patient if forced to return to Sweden, is booked on an SAS Airlines flight to Stockholm that is scheduled to depart Friday afternoon from Los Angeles International Airport.

Three weeks ago INS officials pulled Sagermark off the same flight three minutes before its scheduled departure and moments after Judge Rudi Brewster, the same judge who denied his appeals on Monday, stayed his deportation pending a hearing on the new petitions.

In setting the stage, Brewster denied a motion by Sagermark to postpone his deportation until the INS Board of Immigration Appeals ruled on a request to reconsider his case because deportation would impose a hardship on him and his family.

Although the board has not made a final ruling, board officials notified Sagermark that his request was meritless and they would probably deny his request. Based on that initial ruling by the INS appeals board, Brewster denied Sagermark’s motion to reopen the case.

Brewster also rejected arguments by Sagermark that his case deserved reconsideration because he has resided in the United Stated continuously for seven years and is of good moral character. At a July 18 hearing, also in Brewster’s courtroom, INS attorneys challenged Sagermark’s claim of continuous residence, arguing that his stay has been prolonged by the many appeals he has filed over the years.

On Monday, Brewster agreed with the INS attorneys. He cited prior cases where the courts have ruled that a petitioner cannot count as continuous residence the years that he spends pursuing deportation appeals.

Brewster called Sagermark’s voluminous appeals “frivolous.” Then he criticized Sagermark’s move to raise the residency issue “literally at the 11th and a half hour.” Even if Sagermark qualified for reconsideration under the continuous residency rule, Brewster ruled, he had waived his right by waiting so long to file it.

“By only bringing this motion on literally the 11th and a half hour . . . the petitioner has waived his claim,” said Brewster. “It does appear that this petitioner has enjoyed ad nauseum every constitutional right.”

Sagermark and his Guatemalan wife, Francisca, have been in the United States on visitors visas since they entered this country in El Paso in 1975. During Monday’s court hearing, Brewster listed the numerous times that Sagermark agreed to depart voluntarily after being found deportable as an illegal alien, but he failed to show up as promised each time.

Francisca Sagermark is also under order of deportation and her case “is in litigation somewhere,” said INS attorney Charles Hamilton. INS spokesman Cliff Rogers said that last month Mrs. Sagermark rejected an INS offer to help her obtain permanent residency status in Sweden for her and her sons, aged 9 and 3.

Initially, Sagermark had petitioned the INS for political asylum, claiming that he would be tortured if returned to Sweden. His petition was denied at every turn, but he continued to file appeals on his asylum claim until the U.S. Supreme Court denied him a hearing on the matter on June 3.

The Supreme Court denial set the stage for the final appeals denied by Brewster. But even those two appeals were not the last ones filed by Sagermark. At the beginning of Monday’s hearing Brewster notified the INS attorneys and Sagermark’s attorney, K. Kerry Yianilos, that a few hours earlier Sagermark had filed a new appeal in another courtroom.

The government attorneys and Yianilos reacted with surprise. Brewster wryly noted that filing appeals was nothing new for Sagermark, who claims to speak 12 languages. Until he retained Yianilos three weeks ago, Sagermark had argued all of his cases, including the appeal he filed in the Supreme Court.

Hamilton said that Sagermark’s last appeal was probably moot because another U.S. District Court judge is unlikely to overrule Brewster’s decision.

Monday’s hearing also included a lively exchange between Sagermark and his attorney, Yianilos, prompting Brewster to remark that “it has appeared to me that the attorney-client relationship has broken down.”

Yianilos complained that Sagermark had refused to talk to her during the past 10 days and that he walked away when she attempted to approach him in the hall before the hearing. Sagermark complained to Brewster that he felt Yianilos’ fee was too high and that he did not have the money to pay her.

Yianilos countered that Sagermark had asked her to represent him for free or get off the case.

Sagermark finally agreed to let Yianilos continue to represent him but not before complaining to Brewster that Yianilos had not spent all of the $2,000 partial fee he had given her. Brewster asked Sagermark what he thought was a fair price to pay for Yianilos’ services and he replied $80 an hour.

“Well, she says that she worked about 100 hours on this case, and at $80 per hour, that’s about $8,000 that you owe her by my math,” said Brewster.

After the hearing, both attorney and client ignored each other. Yianilos left before the INS took Sagermark away.