Skip to main content
· 9/5/1995

State v. McJimpson

Citations

  • 79 Wash. App. 164

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that an alien's due process rights were not infringed by allegedly constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel because the relief sought was purely discretionary
  • concluding that an alien's due process rights were not infringed by allegedly constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel because the relief sought was purely discretionary
  • concluding that an alien’s due process rights were not infringed by allegedly constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel because the relief sought was purely discretionary
  • holding that remedy of suspension of deportation does not create protected liberty interest
  • holding that counsel’s ineffective assistance did not violate the petitioner’s due process rights because the petitioner did not have a liberty interest in receiving a discretionary grant of suspension of deportation
  • “[W]here a statute or regulation does not limit the executive’s discretion to award relief, an expectancy of such relief does not give rise to a liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cox

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.