In the Matter of Gutierrez

14 Cited authorities

Bridges v. Wixon
326 U.S. 135 (1945) Cited 465 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding only that a court may not admit hearsay for substantive, as opposed to impeachment, purposes
Kovac v. Immigration and Naturalization Serv
407 F.2d 102 (9th Cir. 1969) Cited 98 times
Holding that well-founded fear of persecution was established by "a probability of deliberate imposition of substantial economic disadvantage upon an alien for reasons of race, religion, or political opinion," and remanding denial of asylum where "[i]t became impossible for [a chef] to obtain employment in the occupation for which he was trained"
Aguilera-Enriquez v. Immigration Nat. Serv
516 F.2d 565 (6th Cir. 1975) Cited 56 times 1 Legal Analyses
Discussing Pino and finality for immigration purposes
Zakonaite v. Wolf
226 U.S. 272 (1912) Cited 86 times
In Zakonaite v. Wolf, 226 U.S. 272, 33 S. Ct. 31, 57 L. Ed. 218, the rule was applied that, if it appeared that there was some evidence, and sufficient to satisfy a reasonable man, that the Chinese person claiming the rights of American citizenship was not entitled thereto, he must be excluded.
Barthold v. U.S. I. N. S
517 F.2d 689 (5th Cir. 1975) Cited 18 times
Finding argument waived
Burquez v. Immigration Naturalization Serv
513 F.2d 751 (10th Cir. 1975) Cited 13 times
Holding that an alien was not denied due process where he was without counsel at a deportation hearing because he failed to show he was prejudiced by the absence of counsel
Henriques v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, Board of Immigration Appeals
465 F.2d 119 (2d Cir. 1972) Cited 15 times
Declining to reach question whether potential deportees have a constitutional right to counsel at government expense absent a showing of prejudice
Murgia-Melendrez v. U.S. Immigration
407 F.2d 207 (9th Cir. 1969) Cited 11 times
Holding that a minor may make an intelligent waiver of constitutional rights under certain circumstances
De Souza v. Barber
263 F.2d 470 (9th Cir. 1959) Cited 16 times
In De Souza v. Barber, 263 F.2d 470 (9th Cir. 1959), we did address whether there is a timeliness requirement that can bar a collateral attack in reinstatement proceedings based on a purported gross miscarriage of justice, and we held that there is.
Rosales-Caballero v. Immigration Natural
472 F.2d 1158 (5th Cir. 1973) Cited 2 times
No. 72-2229. January 26, 1973. Denise David Schwartzman, Legal Services of Greater Miami, Inc., Miami, Fla., for petitioner. Richard G. Kleindienst, U.S. Atty. Gen., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Troy A. Adams, Jr., Dist. Director, I.N.S., New Orleans, La., Robert W. Rust, U.S. Atty., Robert L. Woytych, Dist. Director, I.N.S., Miami, Fla., John L. Murphy, Donald H. Feige, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., for respondent. Petition on review of the Immigration and Naturalization Service
Section 1251 - Transferred
8 U.S.C. § 1251 Cited 2,159 times 1 Legal Analyses
Delineating crimes that make alien deportable

In the Matter of Gutierrez

14 Cited authorities

Holding only that a court may not admit hearsay for substantive, as opposed to impeachment, purposes

Discussing Pino and finality for immigration purposes

In Zakonaite v. Wolf, 226 U.S. 272, 33 S. Ct. 31, 57 L. Ed. 218, the rule was applied that, if it appeared that there was some evidence, and sufficient to satisfy a reasonable man, that the Chinese person claiming the rights of American citizenship was not entitled thereto, he must be excluded.

Finding argument waived

Holding that an alien was not denied due process where he was without counsel at a deportation hearing because he failed to show he was prejudiced by the absence of counsel

Declining to reach question whether potential deportees have a constitutional right to counsel at government expense absent a showing of prejudice

Holding that a minor may make an intelligent waiver of constitutional rights under certain circumstances

In De Souza v. Barber, 263 F.2d 470 (9th Cir. 1959), we did address whether there is a timeliness requirement that can bar a collateral attack in reinstatement proceedings based on a purported gross miscarriage of justice, and we held that there is.

Delineating crimes that make alien deportable