SANCHEZ
Citations
- 21 I. & N. Dec. 444
Syllabus
SANCHEZ, 21 I&N Dec. 444 (BIA 1996) ID 3283 (PDF) (1) Under the present statutory and regulatory scheme, an Immigration Judge properly declined to order an alien excluded in absentia where the Immigration and Naturalization Service did not detain or parole the alien at the time he applied for admission to the United States, but instead returned him to Mexico with instructions to appear for an exclusion hearing at a later date. (2) By directing an applicant for admission to return to Mexico after being served with a Notice to Applicant for Admission Detained for Hearing before an Immigration Judge (Form I-122), the Service in effect consented to the alien's withdrawal of that application when the alien elected not to return to pursue his application for admission to the United States. Pro se
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- Rosenberg, concurring and dissent- ing in part
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Cited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Biden v. TexasSupreme Court· 2022-06-30· cited 170×
- Innovation Law Lab v. Chad WolfNinth Circuit· 2020-02-28· cited 19×
- Innovation Law Lab v. McAleenanNinth Circuit· 2019-05-07· cited 17×
- Melida Luna-Garcia v. William Barr, U. S. Atty GenFifth Circuit· 2019-07-23· cited 16×
- O-J-OBoard of Immigration Appeals· 1996-07-01· cited 10×
- Innovation Law Lab v. NielsenN.D. California· 2019-04-08· cited 9×
- Innovation Law Lab v. Kevin McAleenanNinth Circuit· 2019-05-07
- M-D-C-VBoard of Immigration Appeals· 2020-07-14
- Khera v. AshcroftNinth Circuit· 2003-05-09
- Povall v. AshcroftNinth Circuit· 2004-10-28
Cites
43 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 20,645×
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-FonsecaSupreme Court· 1987-03-09· cited 4,149×
- Patterson v. McLean Credit UnionSupreme Court· 1989-06-15· cited 2,518×
- Lorillard v. PonsSupreme Court· 1978-02-22· cited 1,535×
- Brown v. GardnerSupreme Court· 1994-12-12· cited 1,044×
- United States v. MenascheSupreme Court· 1955-04-04· cited 1,032×
- Landon v. PlasenciaSupreme Court· 1982-11-15· cited 890×
- Shaughnessy v. United States Ex Rel. MezeiSupreme Court· 1953-03-16· cited 871×
- Fiallo Ex Rel. Rodriguez v. BellSupreme Court· 1977-04-26· cited 821×
- Kungys v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1988-05-02· cited 789×
- Jean v. NelsonSupreme Court· 1985-06-26· cited 513×
- Leng May Ma v. BarberSupreme Court· 1958-06-16· cited 411×
- Oceanic Steam Navigation Co. v. StranahanSupreme Court· 1909-06-01· cited 358×
- Demarest v. ManspeakerSupreme Court· 1991-01-08· cited 354×
- Jean v. NelsonEleventh Circuit· 1984-02-28· cited 255×
- The Chinese Exclusion CaseSupreme Court· 1889-05-13· cited 251×
- Moises Garcia-Mir v. William French SmithEleventh Circuit· 1985-07-11· cited 162×
- Joseph Bertrand v. Charles Sava, Laissez-Moi Vigile v. Charles SavaSecond Circuit· 1982-06-25· cited 143×
- Massachusetts Trustees of Eastern Gas & Fuel Associates v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1964-05-25· cited 128×
- Alexis Barrera-Echavarria v. Richard H. Rison, WardenNinth Circuit· 1995-01-12· cited 114×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.