United States v. Velasquez-Bosque

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that § 215 is categorically a “crime of violence” for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2
• holding that “[t]he availability of an affirmative defense is not relevant to the categorical analysis” because (continued...) 863 Cite as 25 I&N Dec. 850 (BIA 2012
• concluding that, because courts look to only the statutory definition of the offense, “[t]he availability of an affirmative defense is not relevant to the categorical analysis”
• holding that extortion does not “contain any requirement that property be taken permanently”
• holding that extortion does not “contain any requirement that property be taken permanently”
• stating that “[t]he availability of an affirmative defense is not relevant to the categorical analysis”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).