§
In the Matter of Silva

11 Cited authorities

  1. Harisiades v. Shaughnessy

    342 U.S. 580 (1952)   Cited 577 times
    Holding that the Ex Post Facto Clause does not apply to deportation orders because "[d]eportation, however severe its consequences, has been consistently classified as a civil rather than a criminal procedure"

  2. Stanton v. Stanton

    421 U.S. 7 (1975)   Cited 274 times
    Holding that the means of remedying a constitutionally defective statute "plainly is an issue of state law to be resolved by the [state] courts on remand"

  3. Royster Guano Co. v. Virginia

    253 U.S. 412 (1920)   Cited 1,070 times
    Holding that a classification must be reasonable, not arbitrary, and must rest upon some ground of difference having a fair and substantial relation to the object of the legislation, so that all persons similarly circumstanced shall be treated alike

  4. Francis v. Immigration Naturalization Serv

    532 F.2d 268 (2d Cir. 1976)   Cited 249 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "fundamental fairness" dictates that § 212(c) apply to resident aliens in deportation as well as exclusion proceedings

  5. Fong Yue Ting v. United States

    149 U.S. 698 (1893)   Cited 470 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the political branches could deport residents based solely on their race and deem all people of "the Chinese race" incompetent to sign the affidavit needed for Chinese immigrants to remain lawfully

  6. Dunn v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

    499 F.2d 856 (9th Cir. 1974)   Cited 18 times

    No. 72-2463. June 27, 1974. Rehearing Denied August 15, 1974. William A. Herreras (argued), Ghitterman, Eskin Herreras, Santa Barbara, Cal., for petitioner-appellant. William D. Keller, U.S. Atty., Alan W. Peryam, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent-appellee. Before CHAMBERS and SNEED, Circuit Judges, and KING, District Judge. The Honorable Samuel P. King, United District Judge for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation. OPINION SAMUEL P. KING, District Judge: Petitioner

  7. Arias-Uribe v. Immig. Nat. Service

    466 F.2d 1198 (9th Cir. 1972)   Cited 19 times
    In Arias-Uribe, an alien faced deportation for a narcotics conviction under § 241(a)(11) — a ground that had long been established to correspond to the § 212(a)(23) ground of excludability.

  8. Section 841 - Prohibited acts A

    21 U.S.C. § 841   Cited 94,705 times   148 Legal Analyses
    In § 841 prosecutions, then, it is the fact that the doctor issued an unauthorized prescription that renders his or her conduct wrongful, not the fact of the dispensation itself.

  9. Section 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1182   Cited 9,956 times   71 Legal Analyses
    Holding deportable aliens who have been convicted of "crimes involving moral turpitude"

  10. Section 1251 - Transferred

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

  11. Section 245.5 - Medical examination

    8 C.F.R. § 245.5   Cited 11 times

    Pursuant to section 232(b) of the Act, an applicant for adjustment of status shall be required to have a medical examination by a designated civil surgeon, whose report setting forth the findings of the mental and physical condition of the applicant, including compliance with section 212(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act, shall be incorporated into the record. A medical examination shall not be required of an applicant for adjustment of status who entered the United States as a nonimmigrant spouse, fiancee