Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 14 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Xiao Fei Zheng v. Holder.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Xiao Fei Zheng v. Holder Anchor | green | “in order for this court to reverse the bia with respect to a finding of fact, the evidence must compel a different conclusion from the one reached by the bia.” | 5 |
| 2 | Xiao Fei Zheng v. Holder | green | “the evidence must compel a different conclusion from the one reached by the bia.” | 5 |
| 3 | Delgado v. Holder | green | “the nature of the conviction, the circumstances and underlying facts of the conviction, the type of sentence imposed, and, most importantly, whether the type and circumstances of the crime indicate that the alien will be a danger to the community.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.