Yeremin v. Holder’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “conduct that shocks the public conscience as being inherently base, vile, or depraved, and contrary to the accepted rules of morality and the duties owed between persons or to society in general”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Reyes v. Lynch · Islas-Veloz v. Whitaker

2. “In determining whether a conviction under a federal statute fits the BIA’s definition of a crime involving moral turpitude, we apply what are known as the categorical and modified-cátegorieal approaches. First, the categorical approach is applied, in which we consider whether the full range of conduct encompassed by the statute constitutes a crime of moral turpitude. We thus look to the elements of the offense, rather than the underlying facts of the specific case. If the full range of conduct encompassed by the statute constitutes a crime of moral turpitude, then the conviction is for an offense qualifying as a crime involving moral turpitude.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Fayzullina v. Holder

3. “Where, as here, the BIA expressly adopts and affirms the IJ’s decision but adds comments of its own, we directly review the decision of the IJ while also considering the additional comments made by the [BIA].”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Reyes v. Lynch