In the Matter of Zingis

8 Citing cases

  1. Paredes-Urrestarazu v. U.S. I.N.S.

    36 F.3d 801 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 115 times
    Holding that an IJ is entitled to special deference when "[t]he IJ's factual premise . . . is based solely on his purported eye-witness observation of Petitioner's reactions, rests on inferences drawn exclusively from the petitioner's demeanor"

    Braun v. INS, 992 F.2d 1016, 1019 (9th Cir. 1993). Petitioner notes that, in In re Zignis, 14 I. N. Dec. 621 (BIA 1974), the BIA held that a conviction set aside under the FYCA could not serve as the basis for deportation because such a result would be inconsistent with Congress's objective of "rehabilitat[ing] youthful offenders." In re Zignis, 14 I. N. Dec. at 622.

  2. Paredes-Urrestarazu v. U.S. I.N.S.

    22 F.3d 909 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 1 times

    Braun v. INS, 992 F.2d 1016, 1019 (9th Cir. 1993). Petitioner notes that, in In re Zignis, 14 I. N. Dec. 621 (BIA 1974), the BIA held that a conviction set aside under the FYCA could not serve as the basis for deportation because such a result would be inconsistent with Congress's objective of "rehabilitat[ing] youthful offenders." In re Zignis, 14 I. N. Dec. at 622.

  3. U.S. v. Hovsepian

    307 F.3d 922 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 35 times
    Finding no abuse of discretion in denial of Rule 36 motion despite the fact that "undisputed clerical errors existed"

    Thus, we do not reach the question of whether a set aside conviction may be used as a basis for deportation. See Matter of Zingis, 14 I. N. Dec. 621, 623-24 (BIA 1974); see also Mestre Morera v. INS, 462 F.2d 1030, 1032 (1st Cir. 1972). Alternatively, Yacoubian argues that apart from the FYCA, the district court acted properly as part of its "inherent authority."

  4. Castano v. I.N.S.

    956 F.2d 236 (11th Cir. 1992)   Cited 8 times
    Upholding BIA's determination of removability based on facts underlying conviction for distributing cocaine, even though conviction was expunged under federal youthful-offender rehabilitation statute

    The Immigration Board has previously ruled that convictions expunged under the FYCA may not be considered in deportation proceedings. See Matter of Zingis, 14 I. N. Dec. 621 (BIA 1974). Petitioner argues that the same result should obtain in admissability decisions.

  5. Kolios v. Immigration Naturalization Service

    532 F.2d 786 (1st Cir. 1976)   Cited 9 times

    He questions why he should be deported when someone convicted of a crime of moral turpitude could avoid deportation by obtaining the same order of expungement. He also notes that had he been convicted for a narcotics offense under federal law and dealt with under the Federal Youth Corrections Act, he would not be deported following expungement, Mestre Morera v. INS, 462 F.2d 1030 (1st Cir. 1972); Matter of Zingis, 14 I. N.Dec. ___ (I.D. 2270) (B.I.A. 1974). Further, the Service now accords recognition to state expungements of marijuana offenders treated and expunged under state juvenile statutes, Matter of Andrade, 14 I. N.Dec. ___ (I.D. 2276) (B.I.A. 1974).

  6. Torres v. Kerry

    938 F. Supp. 2d 990 (S.D. Cal. 2013)

    And they have some authority on their side. See, e.g., Matter of Zingis, 14 I. & N. Dec. 621, 625 (BIA 1974) (“Under the provisions of the Federal Youth Corrections Act, the conviction, when it is set aside, is totally set aside. It may not be used in any way. It is a greater remedy than a pardon.”). The biggest problem for Martha and Jorge is jurisdictional: the doctrine of consular nonreviewability insulates the decisions of consular officers from review.

  7. Torres v. Kerry

    CASE NO. 12-CV-2309-LAB (JMA) (S.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2013)

    And they have some authority on their side. See, e.g., Matter of Zingis, 14 I. & N. Dec. 621, 625 (BIA 1974) ("Under the provisions of the Federal Youth Corrections Act, the conviction, when it is set aside, is totally set aside. It may not be used in any way. It is a greater remedy than a pardon."). The biggest problem for Martha and Jorge is jurisdictional: the doctrine of consular nonreviewability insulates the decisions of consular officers from review.

  8. Urteaga-Saenz v. United States

    CIVIL ACTION NO. 10-22885-KKD (S.D. Fla. Jul. 13, 2012)   Cited 1 times

    Two years later, the Board of Immigration Appeals agreed and expressly held that convictions set aside by FYCA carry no immigration consequences. See Matter of Zingis, 14 I. & N. Dec. 621, 624 (BIA 1974). ("Under the provisions of the Federal Youth Corrections Act, the conviction, when it is set aside, is totally set aside. It may not be used in any way.").