Robert Eric Wade, III v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that whether an omission hurts credibility “depends in part on the importance that the omitted fact would have had for the purpose of the earlier telling”
• explaining that, 17 “in a hypothetical case, a petitioner who later claims to 18 have been brutally beaten but omitted any reference to a 19 beating from his earlier description of his persecution 20 (there mentioning only less brutal conduct such as a slap in 21 the face
• “Whether . . . such 21 statements are inconsistent depends in part on the importance 5 1 that the omitted fact would have had for the purpose of the 2 earlier telling.”
• “Omissions are undoubtedly probative of untruthfulness in circumstances where 1 Contrary to Sherpa’s assertions, the agency did not err in relying on the interview record. See Ming Zhang v. Holder, 585 F.3d 715, 725 (2d Cir. 2009

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).