Noble v. Keisler

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Board has the authority to reach a different result on discretion than that reached by the Immigration Judge
• holding that the BIA has the authority to reach a different result on discretion than that reached by the Immigration Judge
• recognizing that “the BIA’s declining 15 properly to defer to factual findings by the IJ . . . will amount to an error of law” 16 even in the context of generally unreviewable denials of discretionary relief
• recognizing that “the BIA’s declining 15 properly to defer to factual findings by the IJ . . . will amount to an error of law” 16 even in the context of generally unreviewable denials of discretionary relief
• noting that petitioner’s deportation proceedings began in 1993, were administratively closed while he was incarcerated, and were reopened again in 2002, after which petitioner remained eligible for section 212(c
• affirming because an ambiguous statement, in context, was 2 In the same three-paragraph discussion, the BIA noted Hernandez’s five other criminal convictions (particularly the disturbing facts of his 2009 conviction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).