In re Salad

33 Cited authorities

Mathis v. United States
136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) Cited 4,449 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court employing the categorical approach "looks to a limited class of documents"
Moncrieffe v. Holder
569 U.S. 184 (2013) Cited 1,384 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that sharing marijuana not an aggravated felony
State v. Murphy
545 N.W.2d 909 (Minn. 1996) Cited 306 times
Holding that a challenge to probationary-release conditions was premature because the defendant was not eligible for release for several years
Schenck v. United States
249 U.S. 47 (1919) Cited 746 times 6 Legal Analyses
Finding the right to free speech to be limited during World War I, reasoning “[w]hen a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured”
State v. Rund
896 N.W.2d 527 (Minn. 2017) Cited 88 times
Holding that defendant's threats to kill police officers were not less serious because they were made with a reckless disregard of the risk of terrorizing, as opposed to a purposeful intent to cause terror; the terroristic-threats statute prohibited both purposeful and reckless conduct
State v. Franks
765 N.W.2d 68 (Minn. 2009) Cited 96 times
Holding that the district court must impose a sentence for the pattern of harassing conduct offense rather than the four violations of an order for protection because it was the most serious offense against the single victim
State v. Smith
825 N.W.2d 131 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012) Cited 78 times
Holding that a prosecutor's statements that a particular witness was "very sincere" and "very frank in his testimony" were arguments regarding the witness's credibility and not improper vouching
State v. Schweppe
306 Minn. 395 (Minn. 1975) Cited 223 times
Holding that there was sufficient evidence on the element of intent where defendant testified that he wanted to make the victim "paranoid" and that the victim's reaction was circumstantial evidence relevant to the element of intent
Latter–Singh v. Holder
668 F.3d 1156 (9th Cir. 2012) Cited 59 times
Holding that we lack jurisdiction over "the discretionary use of" power under § 1159(c)
State v. Bjergum
771 N.W.2d 53 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 47 times
Determining that the jury did not need to receive an intoxication instruction because terroristic threats made with reckless disregard is not a specific-intent crime
Section 924 - Penalties
18 U.S.C. § 924 Cited 68,828 times 189 Legal Analyses
Holding that conviction for eluding police, under Maine statute which provides that "[w]hoever, after being requested or signaled to stop, attempts to elude a law enforcement officer by driving a vehicle at a reckless rate of speed which results in a high-speed chase between the operator's vehicle and any law enforcement vehicle using a blue light and siren is guilty" of a felony-level crime, involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)
Section 1101 - Definitions
8 U.S.C. § 1101 Cited 16,778 times 91 Legal Analyses
Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status
Section 1227 - Deportable aliens
8 U.S.C. § 1227 Cited 8,054 times 42 Legal Analyses
Granting this discretion to the Attorney General
Section 16 - Crime of violence defined
18 U.S.C. § 16 Cited 3,510 times 62 Legal Analyses
Defining a crime of violence as ‘ an offense that has as an element the use . . . of physical force against the person or property of another’
Section 1003.30 - Additional charges in deportation or removal hearings
8 C.F.R. § 1003.30 Cited 39 times
Providing that DHS may file additional or substitute charges of removability "[a]t any time during deportation or removal proceedings" and that an "alien may be given a reasonable continuance to respond to the additional factual allegations and charges"

In re Salad

33 Cited authorities

Holding that a court employing the categorical approach "looks to a limited class of documents"

Holding that sharing marijuana not an aggravated felony

Holding that a challenge to probationary-release conditions was premature because the defendant was not eligible for release for several years

Finding the right to free speech to be limited during World War I, reasoning “[w]hen a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace are such a hindrance to its effort that their utterance will not be endured”

Holding that defendant's threats to kill police officers were not less serious because they were made with a reckless disregard of the risk of terrorizing, as opposed to a purposeful intent to cause terror; the terroristic-threats statute prohibited both purposeful and reckless conduct

Holding that the district court must impose a sentence for the pattern of harassing conduct offense rather than the four violations of an order for protection because it was the most serious offense against the single victim

Holding that a prosecutor's statements that a particular witness was "very sincere" and "very frank in his testimony" were arguments regarding the witness's credibility and not improper vouching

Holding that there was sufficient evidence on the element of intent where defendant testified that he wanted to make the victim "paranoid" and that the victim's reaction was circumstantial evidence relevant to the element of intent

Holding that we lack jurisdiction over "the discretionary use of" power under § 1159(c)

Determining that the jury did not need to receive an intoxication instruction because terroristic threats made with reckless disregard is not a specific-intent crime

Finding notice and comment rulemaking is required for the agency's interim rule recognizing fear of coercive family practices as basis for refugee status

Granting this discretion to the Attorney General

Defining a crime of violence as ‘ an offense that has as an element the use . . . of physical force against the person or property of another’

Providing that DHS may file additional or substitute charges of removability "[a]t any time during deportation or removal proceedings" and that an "alien may be given a reasonable continuance to respond to the additional factual allegations and charges"