Cherichel v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis
591 F.3d 1002 · 2010
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2340 · 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (§ 208 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (§ 212 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (§ 241 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter)) · 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (§ 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 (McCarran-Walter))
Relies on Morissette v. United States · Personnel Administrator of Mass. v. Feeney · United States v. Bailey · Carter v. United States · Zubeda v. Ashcroft
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Factual determinations lie outside our scope of review and ... we lack the jurisdiction to reweigh the evidence before the BIA.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Marambo v. Barr“We note, however, that while OLC opinions are generally binding on the Executive branch, the courts are not bound by them.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.