§
Matter of Madruga

14 Cited authorities

  1. U.S. v. Corona-Sanchez

    291 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 286 times
    Holding that a presentence report may establish the fact of a prior conviction where the defendant does not contest that he was not convicted under the relevant statute

  2. Abimbola v. Ashcroft

    378 F.3d 173 (2d Cir. 2004)   Cited 94 times
    Holding that when a term in INA is undefined, the "BIA's interpretation is 'given controlling weight unless [it is] arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute'" (alteration in original) (quoting Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837, 844 (1984))

  3. Valansi v. Ashcroft

    278 F.3d 203 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 97 times
    Holding 18 U.S.C. § 656, which prohibits embezzlement by a bank employee, is a divisible statute that covers embezzlement with either intent to injure or intent to defraud, even though the statute on its face does not distinguish between the two, because the caselaw applying the statute distinguishes the two in defining the elements of the crime

  4. Soliman v. Gonzales

    419 F.3d 276 (4th Cir. 2005)   Cited 78 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal agency's interpretation of state law was not entitled to deference

  5. Conteh v. Gonzales

    461 F.3d 45 (1st Cir. 2006)   Cited 68 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "assertion that the IJ (and thus, the BIA) misconstrued the evidence and, in the bargain, relied too heavily on a vague and general report of changed country conditions ... is a classic claim of factual error"

  6. Hernandez-Mancilla v. I.N.S.

    246 F.3d 1002 (7th Cir. 2001)   Cited 49 times
    Finding Black's Law Dictionary's definition as supporting an interpretation of § 1101(G)'s "theft offense" as a "broad" definition that includes the receipt of stolen property

  7. Burke v. Mukasey

    509 F.3d 695 (5th Cir. 2007)   Cited 36 times
    Holding that a conviction under N.Y. Penal Law § 165.50 is an aggravated felony conviction

  8. Nugent v. Ashcroft

    367 F.3d 162 (3d Cir. 2004)   Cited 39 times
    Holding that the Pennsylvania theft by deception statute was both a "theft offense" under § 1101(G) and also "an offense that . . . involves fraud or deceit" under § 1101(M), and therefore subject to the requirements of both subsections, because "the state statute is bottomed on 'fraud or deceit'"

  9. Bobb v. Attorney General of the United States

    458 F.3d 213 (3d Cir. 2006)   Cited 30 times
    Explaining that forgery can be an aggravated felony as either an "fraud or deceit" offense under § 1101(M) or a "forgery" offense under § 1101(R)

  10. Penuliar v. Gonzales

    435 F.3d 961 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 31 times
    Adding an asterisk to the caption tied to a footnote to indicate "Alberto R. Gonzales is substituted for his predecessor, John Ashcroft, as Attorney General of the United States. . . ."

  11. Section 1101 - Definitions

    8 U.S.C. § 1101   Cited 16,705 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

  12. Section 1951 - Interference with commerce by threats or violence

    18 U.S.C. § 1951   Cited 11,978 times   51 Legal Analyses
    Defining extortion in ACCA as “the obtaining of something of value from another, with his consent, induced by the wrongful use or threatened use of force against the person or property of another ”

  13. Section 1227 - Deportable aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1227   Cited 8,031 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Granting this discretion to the Attorney General