LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
Fourth Circuit on standard of review: Turkson v. Holder

"The BIA erred in reviewing the IJ’s factual findings under the de novo standard of review instead of under the clearly erroneous standard prescribed by its governing regulations. We therefore grant Turkson’s petition for review, vacate the BIA’s decision, and remand for further...

CA9 on Citizenship, Standard of Review: Mondaca-Vega v. Holder

Majority: "Who is Petitioner? Is he Reynaldo Carlon Mondaca, a native and citizen of the United States, or is he Salvador Mondaca-Vega, a native and citizen of Mexico? The district court determined that Petitioner is Salvador Mondaca-Vega and, accordingly, that he is not a United States citizen...

CA7 on CAT, Standard of Review - Estrada-Martinez v. Lynch

Estrada-Martinez v. Lynch, Dec. 31, 2015 - "Estrada is not eligible for withholding of removal because he was convicted in an Illinois state court of statutory rape in 1996, and the Board has characterized his conviction as “particularly serious.” Committing a crime that the Attorney...

CA9 on Reasonable Fear Determinations, Reinstatement, Standard of Review: Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch

Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, Apr. 29, 2016 - "Nelson Andrade-Garcia petitions for review of the immigration judge’s determination, in a reasonable fear proceeding, that he lacked a reasonable fear of torture and therefore is not entitled to relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) from...

CA4 on Standard of Review: Upatcha v. Sessions

Upatcha v. Sessions, Feb. 22, 2017 - "Facing deportation, petitioner Juraluk Upatcha, a citizen of Thailand, sought a hardship waiver that would allow her to stay in the country despite the fact that her marriage to a United States citizen had ended in divorce. An immigration judge (“IJ”...

CA3 on Standard of Review; Evidence: Dutton-Myrie v. Atty. Gen.

Dutton-Myrie v. Atty. Gen., Apr. 28, 2017 - "We agree with Dutton-Myrie that the question of whether likely government conduct equates to acquiescence is a mixed question of law and fact under our decision in Kaplun v. Att’y Gen., 602 F.3d 260 (3d. Cir. 2010). What this means is that the Board...