C.F.R. » Title 8 » CHAPTER V—EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › SUBCHAPTER B—IMMIGRATION REGULATIONS › PART 1240—PROCEEDINGS TO DETERMINE REMOVABILITY OF ALIENS IN THE UNITED STATES › Subpart A—Removal Proceedings

8 C.F.R. § 1240.7

Evidence in removal proceedings under section 240 of the Act

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Use of prior statements. The immigration judge may receive in evidence any oral or written statement that is material and relevant to any issue in the case previously made by the respondent or any other person during any investigation, examination, hearing, or trial.

(b) Testimony. Testimony of witnesses appearing at the hearing shall be under oath or affirmation administered by the immigration judge.

(c) Depositions. The immigration judge may order the taking of depositions pursuant to § 1003.35 of this chapter.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2004–2024 · leading case: Joseph v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1235 (9th Cir. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Joseph v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1235 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 12× “[4] In response, the government cites 8 C.F.R. § 1240.7 (a), pertaining to removal hearings, which states that the IJ "may receive in evidence any oral or written statement that is material and relevant to any issue in the case previously made by the respondent or any other…”
Aguilar-Ramos v. Holder, 594 F.3d 701 (9th Cir. 2010). “See also 8 C.F.R. § 1240.7 (a) ("The immigration judge may receive in evidence any oral or written statement that is material and relevant to any issue in the case previously made by the respondent or any other person during an investigation, examination, hearing, or trial.”
Gui Cun Liu Xiu Ding Liu v. John Ashcroft, Attorney Gen. of United States of Am., 372 F.3d 529 (3rd Cir. 2004). “See 8 C.F.R. § 1240.7 (a); Bustos-Torres v. INS, 898 F.”
Jafarzadeh v. Nielsen, 321 F. Supp. 3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “See 8 C.F.R. §§ 1240.7 , 1240.11(a)(3). Given that plaintiffs have plausibly pled a procedural injury, the Court need not determine whether this allegation-or the potential that Jafarzadeh could be subjected to a higher burden of proof to show admissibility before the IJ, see 8…”
Gomez-beltran, 26 I. & N. Dec. 765 (BIA 2016). “2000); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1240.7 (b), 1240.9 (2016). False statements made under oath during proceedings before an Immigration Judge may constitute false testimony within the meaning of section 101(f)(6) of the Act.”
Banat v. Holder, 557 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. 2009). “Tongour’s written report-and likely more levels as it is not clear from the State Department letter that Ms. Tongour received the information she reported directly from the investigator.”
Singh v. Garland, 118 F.4th 1150 (9th Cir. 2024). · cites it 2× “” 8 C.F.R. § 1240.7 (a). An IJ’s “factual findings ‘are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.”
Anaya-Ortiz v. Mukasey, 553 F.3d 1266 (9th Cir. 2009). “We see no reason to question the reliability of testimony giving rise to a “particularly serious crime” determination where the alien is testifying under oath, see 8 C.F.R. § 1240.7 (b), on his own behalf in order to obtain relief from removal, and risking ineligibility for…”
Bassam Hanna v. Loretta Lynch, 644 F. App'x 261 (4th Cir. 2016). “3 “The immigration judge may receive in evidence any oral or written statement that is material and relevant to any issue in the case previously made by the respondent or any other person during any investigation, examination, hearing, or trial.”
Boendi Limbeya v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., 764 F.3d 894 (8th Cir. 2014). “2007) (quotation omitted); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1240.7 (a) (“The immigration judge may receive in evidence any oral or written statement that is material and relevant to any issue in the case previously made by the respondent or any other person during any investigation,…”
Jose Galvan v. Eric Holder, Jr., 403 F. App'x 35 (6th Cir. 2010). “” 8 C.F.R. § 1240.7 (a). “[T]he test for admissibility of evidence [in the immigration context] .”
Corchado-Moya v. Gonzales, 128 F. App'x 74 (10th Cir. 2005). “at 2 (citing 8 C.F.R. § 1240.7 (a)). Further, the Board held that the IJ’s reliance on the affidavit for arrest warrant was not fundamentally unfair because the confidential informant who made it was monitored by a detective wearing a wire, and petitioner “ha[d] not cast doubt…”
Show all 26 citing 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.