 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Gurmeet Singh v. AG of the United States, NO. 05-2266,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) , January 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Alien's motion to reopen in absentia removal order was properly denied because to extent he attempted to raise issue regarding lack of notice of hearing and potential to adjust status, motion to reopen was untimely; even if timely, he failed to present new evidence regarding failure to receive notice and was statutorily ineligible to adjust status.
|
|||||
| Martirosov v. Gonzales, No. 04-2092,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 25, 2006, Opinion filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petition for review was denied. Alien did not exhaust his administrative remedies as to one claim, as required by 8 U.S.C.S. § 1252(d)(1). He was not prejudiced by negative finding arising from his failure to present corroborating evidence. Alien did not challenge IJ's finding that he was not persecuted and did not have fear of future persecution.
|
|||||
| Dalip Singh v. AG of the United States, No. 04-4079,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 26, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the BIA's only comment about documents submitted by a citizen of India went to the citizen's credibility rather than to the sufficiency of his proof, the court could not tell what the basis for the BIA's conclusion was and the court was obligated to remand the case to the BIA for clarification and, if necessary, further proceedings.
|
|||||
| United States v. Bowley, No: 05-3460,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 26, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court reversed motion in limine order, which excluded evidence from defendant's upcoming trial on a 8 U.S.C.S. § 1326 illegal reentry charge. Pursuant to Lopez-Mendoza, evidence taken from defendant's immigration file was not subject to U.S. Const. amend IV suppression, even though defendant's illegal arrest had led agents to immigration file.
|
|||||
| United States v. Oppong, No. 03-4112, No. 03-4378,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT, January 26, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Identification by witness involved in supply of cocaine to conspiracy was admissible as encounter in lock-up was not so unnecessarily suggestive so as to give rise to substantial likelihood of irreparable misidentification. Evidence was sufficient to support drug conspiracy conviction as reasonable jury could have found defendant did not withdraw.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
