Francisco Romero v. United States Immigration and Naturalization Service, John Ashcroft and James M. Ziglar

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that counsel was “reasonable and prudent” to forgo available argument because that argument could “impair [petitioner’s] credibility”
• holding that counsel was “reasonable and prudent” to forgo available argument because that argument could “impair [petitioner’s] credibility”
• holding that counsel’s decision to omit issue that may have hurt applicant’s credibility is not ineffective assistance

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).