In any proceeding before an Immigration Judge,
(a) Any of the following documents or records shall be admissible as evidence in proving a criminal conviction:
(1) A record of judgment and conviction;
(2) A record of plea, verdict and sentence;
(3) A docket entry from court records that indicates the existence of a conviction;
(4) Minutes of a court proceeding or a transcript of a hearing that indicates the existence of a conviction;
(5) An abstract of a record of conviction prepared by the court in which the conviction was entered, or by a state official associated with the state's repository of criminal justice records, that indicates the following: The charge or section of law violated, the disposition of the case, the existence and date of conviction, and the sentence;
(6) Any document or record prepared by, or under the direction of, the court in which the conviction was entered that indicates the existence of a conviction.
(b) Any document or record of the types specified in paragraph (a) of this section may be submitted if it complies with the requirement of § 287.6(a) of this chapter, or a copy of any such document or record may be submitted if it is attested in writing by an immigration officer to be a true and correct copy of the original.
(c) Any record of conviction or abstract that has been submitted by electronic means to the Service from a state or court shall be admissible as evidence to prove a criminal conviction if it:
(1) Is certified by a state official associated with the state's repository of criminal justice records as an official record from its repository or by a court official from the court in which conviction was entered as an official record from its repository. Such certification may be by means of a computer-generated signature and statement of authenticity; and,
(2) Is certified in writing by a Service official as having been received electronically from the state's record repository or the court's record repository.
(d) Any other evidence that reasonably indicates the existence of a criminal conviction may be admissible as evidence thereof.
[58 FR 38953, July 21, 1993]
Notes of Decisions
Andrew Shaw v. Jefferson Sessions III, 898 F.3d 448 (4th Cir. 2018).
· cites it 15× “Shaw also introduced a back-up position: even if the Conspiracy Statute were divisible, the IJ improperly considered the indictment in contravention of 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 , which, Shaw argued, prohibited the use of indictments (and other non-certified court documents) as…”
Conteh v. Gonzales, 461 F.3d 45 (1st Cir. 2006).
· cites it 3× “” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 (d). The petitioner asserts that the BIA erred in relying in part on his testimony in the removal hearing to ascertain the proper classification of the conspiracy offense.”
Vijendra K. Singh v Holder, 638 F.3d 1196 (9th Cir. 2011).
“” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 (d). We also conclude that Singh suffered no prejudice when the IJ admitted his RAP sheet without giving him an opportunity to explain or rebut it.”
Barradas v. Holder, 582 F.3d 754 (7th Cir. 2009).
· cites it 2× “Here, we defer to the Attorney General’s regulation for determining what kinds of evidence may be used to prove a criminal conviction in immigration proceedings, 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 . Subsection (d) of this regulation provides that “[a]ny .”
Mauricio Rosales-Pineda v. Alberto R. Gonzales, 452 F.3d 627 (7th Cir. 2006).
· cites it 3× “A roughly equivalent, *631 though slightly narrower, list is included in the Attorney General’s regulations at 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 (a) and that regulation also does not identify rap sheets.”
Jesus Padilla-Martinez v. Eric Holder, Jr., 770 F.3d 825 (9th Cir. 2014).
“§ 1229a(c)(3); 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 . Section 1229a(c)(3)(C) provides as follows: (C) Electronic records In any proceeding under this chapter, any record of conviction or abstract that has been submitted by electronic means to the Service from a State or court shall be admissible…”
Jean-Louis v. Attorney Gen. of the United States, 582 F.3d 462 (3rd Cir. 2009).
“2006) ("[T]he regulation’s catch-all provision authorizes the admission of evidence for the sole purpose of proving 'the existence of a criminal conviction,' 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 (d) (emphasis supplied); it does not authorize the admission of evidence for the purpose of proving…”
Joaquin Sinotes-Cruz v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney Gen., 468 F.3d 1190 (9th Cir. 2006).
“41 (c) (2000) (renumbered at 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 (2003)). It is uncontested that the electronically transmitted records of conviction did not fully comply with the terms of the statute and regulation.”
Ochieng v. Mukasey, 520 F.3d 1110 (10th Cir. 2008).
“§ 1229a(c)(3)(B)(iv), or “[a]ny document or record prepared by, or under the direction of, the court in which the conviction was entered that indicates the existence of a conviction,” 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41 (a)(6). Further, contrary to Mr.”
— 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41(a) — 1 case
— 8 C.F.R. § 1003.41(a)(4) — 2 cases
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.