Neil Monet v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that in Costello v. INS, supra, there was no issue as to whether the petitioner had lawfully acquired his naturalized status
• holding that the alien was ineligible for section 212(c) relief because he concealed a drug conviction when he adjusted his status and therefore was not lawfully admitted
• concluding that an alien who had concealed a prior drug conviction in obtaining permanent resident status had not been “lawfully” granted that status and could not seek discretionary waiver of deportation
• “The term ‘lawfully’ denotes compliance with substantive legal requirements, not mere procedural regularity . . . .”
• “Admission is not lawful if it is regular only in form. The term ‘lawfully denotes compliance with substantive legal requirements, not mere procedural regularity[.]” (citation and quotation marks omitted)
• “[A] narrow reading of the term ‘lawfully admitted’ distorts its meaning. Admission is not lawful 3 if it is regular only in form. The term ‘lawfully’ denotes compliance with substantive legal requirements, 4 not mere procedural regularity, ....”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).