Counsel can argue that police reports are inadmissible in removal proceedings for the following reasons:

1. Police reports are unreliable. (United States v. Johnson, ___ F.3d ___ (8th Cir. 2013). To overcome a hearsay objection, the government would need to call the officer who wrote it as a witness, subject to cross-examination. INA 240b4B. Cinapian v. Holder, 567 F.3d 1067, 1074 (9th Cir. 2009) (DHS may not use evidence from absent witness unless first establishes that despite reasonable efforts it was unable to secure presence at hearing).
2. Respondent had no opportunity at the criminal level to review, object, or rebut the information contained in the report, since he never went to criminal court.
3. Matter of Arreguin, 21 I & N Dec 38, 42 (BIA 1995) ("Just as we will not go behind a record of conviction to determine the guilt or innocence of an alien, so we are hesitant to give substantial weight to an arrest report, absent a conviction or corroborating evidence of the allegations contained therein. Here, the applicant conceded that the arrest took place but admitted to no wrongdoing. Considering that prosecution was declined and that there is no corroboration, from the applicant or otherwise, we give the apprehension report little weight.").
4. It's likely triple or even quadruple hearsay, which raises due process concerns re confrontation, notice, etc. If the judge overrules this objection (which he or she will), then the next objection is that you want it excluded absent the ability to cross-examine the officer who produced it. This will also be overruled. Then object that if the judge chooses to admit the document, it must be given very little probative weight given your prior objections, and in fact, your clients testimony in-court and subject to cross examination should be admitted and seen as inherently more probative and reliable.