Argueta v. Holder, No. 09-4021, concerned a petition for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the judgment of the immigration judge denying petitioner’s application for special rule cancellation of removal under the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act.  The court denied the petition on the ground that the court found nothing in the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions that temporally limited the discretionary factors the agency may consider in deciding whether to grant cancellation of removal to an applicant who was statutorily eligible for that relief.

In US v. Shyne, No. 08-0865, the court affirmed defendants’ convictions for criminal conspiracies to commit bank fraud and launder money by stealing, altering or counterfeiting checks and depositing the checks into bank accounts, holding that the district court properly denied defendants’ application to require government production of all written or recorded statements, including comprehensive notes from proffer sessions, of coconspirators who would not be testifying at trial but whose statements the government intended to introduce at trial as statements made in furtherance of the conspiracy, because the disclosure requirements of the Jencks Act did not apply to non-testifying declarants.

Related Resources

  • Full Text of Argueta v. Holder, No. 09-4021
  • Full Text of Matthews v. US, No. 09-0321
  • Full Text of US v. Shyne, No. 08-0865

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Civil Rights

Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court

Criminal

Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records

Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules