 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Tarnavskiy v. United States Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 04-2679,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A petition for review was dismissed as to an untimely asylum application since the court lacked jurisdiction to review the claim. The petition was denied as to the alien's withholding of removal and CAT claims since substantial evidence supported, inter alia, the IJ's finding that the alien had not established that he had suffered past persecution.
|
|||||
| United States v. Hyman, 05-4590-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was entitled to resentencing because a district court violated Sixth Amendment in light of Booker in applying USSG in mandatory fashion. Error was not harmless because the court could not be certain that sentence would have been same if defendant had been able to present to district court arguments not available to him at original remand.
|
|||||
| United States v. Quattrone, Docket No. 04-5007-cr,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's grand jury and agency obstruction, 15 U.S.C.S. §§ 1503, 1505, convictions were vacated because the jury instructions on these counts erroneously relieved the jury of having to make findings of wrongful intent, corrupt intent, and the nexus requirement, in assessing criminal liability.
|
|||||
| Weindorf v. Netscape Communs. Corp., No. 05-3072-cv (L), 31 05-3079-cv (CON), 05-3081-cv (CON),
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: American Rule applied and required each party to bear its own attorney's fees where plaintiffs failed to establish a "violation" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.S. § 2520 because, inter alia, district court never ruled that defendants engaged in a violation, cases settled, and no collateral proceeding had otherwise deemed defendants to be violators.
|
|||||
| Xiang Guo Chen v. Gonzales, No. 04-4520-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because an IJ and the BIA completely ignored aspects of the 2001 State Department Report that fully corroborated a Chinese citizen's position that practitioners of Falun Gong were persecuted in 1998 and early 1999, the case was remanded for further consideration of the citizen's asylum, withholding and CAT claims.
|
|||||
| Yan Xia Huang v. Gonzales, No. 04-3052,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While an alien's documentary evidence did suggest that returning illegal immigrants might be fined or imprisoned by Chinese authorities, CAT did not protect against such lawful sanctions that did not defeat its object and purpose.
|
|||||
| Yu Guang Zheng v. Bd. of Immigration Appeals, 03-40366,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review was denied as the IJ's adverse credibility finding was substantially supported by the record as a whole. Alien testified that his wife was forcibly sterilized in 1989, but the only documentary evidence of the sterilization was a certificate dated 1991; the forced sterilization claim was integral to the alien's persecution claim.
|
|||||
| Zun Xiang Lin v. Bd. of Immigration Appeals, No. 05-2508-ag NAC,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT, March 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: BIA did not abuse discretion in denying motion to reopen as untimely under 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), as alien did not show he exercised due diligence to warrant tolling on ground he did not learn about misconduct of individuals who helped him until 2005. He filed prior motion to reopen in 2003, alleging ineffective assistance of same individuals.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
