United States v. Kevin Eric Scott

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 district court erred by considering “ex post data” in the form of the defendant’s criminal conviction after being deported
• noting that “it would be anomalous to consider criminal conduct after” the relevant date
• stating that “in assessing whether the defendant-alien had a reasonable probability of not being deported at his proceeding ..., the district court should reconstruct events as they existed at the time of the disputed deportation proceeding, without considering future occurrences”
• stating that “in assessing whether the defendant-alien had a reasonable probability of not being deported at his proceeding ... the district court should reconstruct events as they existed at the time of the disputed deportation proceedings, without consider ing future occurrences”
• “Because [a § 1326(d) inquiry] entails mixed questions of law and fact, we review de novo the district court’s denial of [the defendant’s] motion to dismiss the indictment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).