Kastigar v. United States, 406 U.S. 441, 444-45 (1972) (the privilege against self-incrimination may be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory, and it protects against any disclosures that the witness reasonably believes could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead to other evidence that might be so used.); Matter of Benitez, 19 I&N Dec. 173 (BIA 1984) (respondents are not entitled to a separate hearing on a motion to suppress evidence on grounds of a violation of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination); Matter of Barcenas, 19 I&N Dec. 609, 611 (BIA 1988) (when a movant submits evidence that could provide a basis for excluding the evidence in question, the claims must be supported by testimony, implying that IJs must therefore allow respondents to testify in support of a motion to suppress, even if a separate suppression hearing is not required); Matter of Velasquez, 19 I&N 377, 379 (BIA 1986) (Since it is a crime to enter the United States without inspection, the IJ found the respondent had properly invoked the privilege.); see generally Legal Action Center, Practice Advisory, Motions to Suppress in Removal Proceedings: A General Overview, Part 4, pp. 26-27 (Oct. 12, 2011).