B

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a “single scheme” exists when “there are a series of similar acts which occurred at ‘one time,” as when “A & B are indecently fondled at the same time”
• holding that a “single scheme” exists when “there are a series of similar acts which occurred at ‘one time,” as when “A & B are indecently fondled at the same time”
• recognizing a single scheme “[w]here there are a series of similar acts which occurred at ‘one time,’” for example “A, B, and C are robbed by the alien at the same time”
• recognizing a single scheme “[w]here there are a series of similar acts which occurred at ‘one time,’” for example “A, B, and C are robbed by the alien at the same time”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Istvan Szonyi v. Matthew Whitaker
  Ninth Circuit· 2019-02-13· cited 81×
• ADETIBA
  Board of Immigration Appeals· 1992-07-01· cited 30×
• Barrese v. Ryan
  D. Connecticut· 1962-03-30· cited 15×
• ISLAM
  Board of Immigration Appeals· 2011-07-01· cited 8×
• BAEZA-GALINDO
  Board of Immigration Appeals· 2025-01-31· cited 1×
• Istvan Szonyi v. William Barr
  Ninth Circuit· 2019-11-13

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Hagood v. State
  Court of Appeals of Georgia· 1908-10-26· cited 35×
• Hadden v. State
  Supreme Court of Georgia· 1943-11-11· cited 4×