granting a writ of certiorari regarding the Ninth Circuit's decision that the residual clause at 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague
Summary of this case from United States v. RossNo. 15–1498.
09-29-2016
Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, petitioner, v. James Garcia DIMAYA.
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted.
granting a writ of certiorari regarding the Ninth Circuit's decision that the residual clause at 18 U.S.C. § 16(b) is unconstitutionally vague
Summary of this case from United States v. Rossgranting certiorari review to decide whether Section 16(b), as incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act's provisions governing an alien's removal from the United States, is unconstitutionally vague
Summary of this case from Hobbs v. United Statesgranting certiorari review to decide whether Section 16(b), as incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act's provisions governing an alien's removal from the United States, is unconstitutionally vague
Summary of this case from Tolbert v. United Statesgranting certiorari review to decide whether Section 16(b), as incorporated into the Immigration and Nationality Act's provisions governing an alien's removal from the United States, is unconstitutionally vague
Summary of this case from Garcia v. United Statesgranting writ of certiorari on same question regarding identical language in 18 U.S.C. § 16(b)
Summary of this case from United States v. RoofIn Lynch, the Supreme Court will decide whether the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), using language similar to that struck down by Johnson in the ACCA, is unconstitutionally vague.
Summary of this case from Cruz v. United StatesIn Dimaya the plaintiff, a citizen of the Philippines, filed a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) determination that his California convictions for first-degree residential burglary were categorically "crimes of violence" pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), and, therefore, he was removable for having been convicted of an aggravated felony.
Summary of this case from United States v. LasichIn Dimaya, the Ninth Circuit examined a provision for the removal of non-citizens who have been convicted of an "aggravated felony."
Summary of this case from United States v. FigueroaIn Dimaya, the Ninth Circuit, relying on the analysis in Johnson, held that 18 U.S.C. § 16(b), as incorporated in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F) is unconstitutionally vague.
Summary of this case from United States v. FigueroaFull title:Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, petitioner, v. James Garcia DIMAYA.
Court:Supreme Court of the United States
Date published: Sep 29, 2016
(c)); United States v. Hernandez, No. 2:16-cr-39-NT, 2017 WL 111730, at *4-5 & n.6 (D. Me. Jan. 11, 2017)…
Robinson v. United StatesORDERThis matter is before the Court on Petitioner's motion to stay and hold Petitioner's motion pursuant to…