By PETER T. KILBORN

          WASHINGTON, April 24 -- The fact that Elián González is now
          in the custody of his father, Juan Miguel González, most likely weakens his, or his
          Miami relatives', case for him to be granted asylum in the United States,
          immigration lawyers say.

          Before federal marshals wrested the 6-year-old Cuban boy from the relatives'
          home in Miami just before dawn on Saturday, he had signed an application
          for asylum. Last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in
          Atlanta agreed to hear his application on May 11, and his father agreed to hold
          Elián in the United States until then.

          But now that Mr. González has custody of his son, he can make a stronger case
          against asylum and take him home to Cuba, perhaps well before May 11, said
          Jose Pertierra, an immigration lawyer in Washington who is not involved with the
          case.

          "I'm sure that's what's being planned by Juan Miguel's attorneys," Mr. Pertierra
          said. He said the case of Lázaro González, the great-uncle who had been
          holding the boy in Miami, had been weakened by several factors,
          including his losing the day-to-day care of the boy, which the Justice
          Department allowed until days before the raid on the house.

          The father, whose lawyers have not disclosed their strategy, could try to
          withdraw the application for asylum that Elián signed, Mr. Pertierra said,
          or he could ask Elián himself to withdraw it.

          Or the Immigration and Naturalization Service could interview the boy,
          find that he is not competent to understand his application and ask the
          court to dismiss it. That, however, appears unlikely.

          "It's not something we would do," said Maria Cardona, spokeswoman
          for the immigration service.

          She said the argument the immigration service intends to make before the
          court's three judges is not whether the asylum application should be
          honored or dismissed but whether a 6-year-old is competent to make
          one. In an 83-page brief filed today with the appeals court, the Justice
          Department argued that the asylum application was not the boy's doing
          and that it amounted to "a substantial intrusion into the realm of parental
          authority for a distant relative to be able to trigger government
          procedures concerning the parent's 6-year-old son."