Pinho v. Atty Gen USA

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 plaintiff had exhausted his remedies because there was no appeal available to him until he was placed in removal proceedings
• holding that where the record shows that the state did not answer a pending ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim before agreeing to settlement, this supports the conclusion that the settlement was reached as a result of the constitutional claim
• finding that the agency retained “sole control over whether an individual’s purely legal claim ... may ever be brought before the courts”
• noting that agency action must be non-discretionary under APA and explaining that “Section 1252(a)(2)(B
• refusing to scrutinize further the decisions of prosecutors or judges when the only basis for the vacatur stated in the record was a claim of a defect in the conviction
• refusing to scrutinize further the decisions of prosecutors or judges when the only basis for the vacatur stated in the record was a claim of a defect in the conviction

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).