§

In the Matter of Esqueda

20 I&N Dec. 850 (B.I.A. 1994)
In the Matter of Esqueda

46 Cited authorities

  1. Robinson v. California

    370 U.S. 660 (1962)   Cited 2,213 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that states cannot criminalize the "status" of substance addiction, just as they could not "make it a criminal offense for a person to be mentally ill"

  2. Morissette v. United States

    342 U.S. 246 (1952)   Cited 2,300 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it is a defense to a charge of "knowingly converting" federal property that one did not know that what one was doing was a conversion

  3. Woodby v. Immigration Service

    385 U.S. 276 (1966)   Cited 753 times
    Holding that "no deportation order may be entered unless it is found by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence that the facts alleged as grounds for deportation are true"

  4. United States v. Freed

    401 U.S. 601 (1971)   Cited 523 times
    Holding that a violation of § 5861(d) may be established without proof that the defendant was aware of the fact that the firearm he possessed was unregistered

  5. United States v. Dotterweich

    320 U.S. 277 (1943)   Cited 690 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that consciousness of wrongdoing is not necessary for conviction

  6. United States v. Balint

    258 U.S. 250 (1922)   Cited 461 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "person dealing in drugs" must "ascertain at his peril whether that which he sells comes within the inhibition of statute" and is permissibly subject to criminal penalties despite his "ignorance" of a drug's illegality

  7. People v. Daniels

    14 Cal.3d 857 (Cal. 1975)   Cited 182 times
    In People v. Daniels (1975) 14 Cal.3d 857, 861-862 [ 122 Cal.Rptr. 872, 537 P.2d 1232], we disapproved the particular holding of People v. Holquin, supra, 229 Cal.App.2d 398 (i.e., that furnishing a narcotic is a specific intent crime), because it was based on a misreading of two earlier decisions of this court, but we did not question the statutory analysis quoted hereinabove.

  8. People v. Gorg

    45 Cal.2d 776 (Cal. 1955)   Cited 292 times
    In People v. Gorg (1955) 45 Cal.2d 776 [ 291 P.2d 469] we held that the admissibility of such physical evidence is to be determined by the court as a matter of law. (Id., at pp. 780-781; see also, Evid. Code, § 310, subd. (a).)

  9. Tart v. Massachusetts

    949 F.2d 490 (1st Cir. 1991)   Cited 97 times
    Finding that Massachusetts law barring fishermen from landing raw fish in Massachusetts without a state license was not preempted by a federal fishery license

  10. People v. Winston

    46 Cal.2d 151 (Cal. 1956)   Cited 236 times
    In People v. Winston, 46 Cal.2d 151, 293 P.2d 40, 44, the question was raised on the defendant's proposed instruction that knowledge of the narcotic character of the thing possessed is an essential ingredient of the offense charged.

  11. Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1182   Cited 9,951 times   71 Legal Analyses
    Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

  12. Section 802 - Definitions

    21 U.S.C. § 802   Cited 4,080 times   85 Legal Analyses
    Excluding hemp from the schedules

  13. Section 1251 - Transferred

    8 U.S.C. § 1251   Cited 2,159 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Delineating crimes that make alien deportable

  14. Section 11550 - Unlawful use or under the influence of controlled substance, except when administered by licensed person

    Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 11550   Cited 1,244 times
    Using or being under the influence of a controlled substance

  15. Section 20 - Union of act or intent or criminal negligence

    Cal. Pen. Code § 20   Cited 426 times
    Referring to an act accompanied by intent or negligence