 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Ai Zheng Chen v. Keisler, 06-5186-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) committed clear error and abused its discretion when it denied petitioner alien's motion for reconsideration of an order denying him tolling relief for a period when he was without counsel, because his first motion to reopen was pending before the Board during that period.
|
|||||
| Batts v. Artuz, No. 03-2252-pr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: For purposes of 28 U.S.C.S. § 2254 petition, inmate procedurally defaulted due process claim. In petitioning New York Court of Appeals for leave to appeal, inmate discussed only unrelated jury instructions claim and instead forwarded to Court of Appeals copies of parties' briefs before Appellate Division, which actually discussed due process claim.
|
|||||
| Kurukulasooriyage v. Keisler, 07-1041-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(b)(4)(B), substantial evidence supported IJ's denial of withholding of removal to Sri Lankan applicant where IJ reasonably found it implausible that applicant willingly returned to Sri Lanka from Singapore, given that he feared being killed by army officers there, and where applicant did not submit corroborating evidence.
|
|||||
| United States v. Robledo, No. 06-4212-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under 18 U.S.C.S. § 2518(1)(c), a district court permissibly admitted evidence obtained through electronic surveillance. Government had considered eight alternative investigatory techniques, but given limits of having only one confidential source, government demonstrated that surveillance was necessary, and judges did not err in their agreement.
|
|||||
| Fuentes-Sambula v. Keisler, No. 06-4640-ag,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The alien's petition for review was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Because the BIA did not address the alien's claims for temporary protected status and adjustment of status, and was under no obligation to do so, the issue was not exhausted in the administrative process, and the court lacked jurisdiction to review these claims for relief.
|
|||||
| Jin Ping Wang v. Keisler, 07-0177-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Chinese aliens' motion to reopen; despite one alien's claims that she had been forcibly sterilized, the record indicated that she gave birth to a third child after allegedly being sterilized, and testimony as to tubal sterilization failures was insufficient to show she had been forcibly sterilized.
|
|||||
| United States v. Diaz, No. 06-1548-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, November 13, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant pled guilty to distribution and possession with intent to distribute 500 grams of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C.S. §§ 812, 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) and 18 U.S.C.S. § 2 and possession of firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking crime in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i), 180-month imprisonment sentence was not unreasonable.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
