Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Smyth

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided January 5, 1996No. 94-10495Published

1DissentReinhardt, Circuit Judge

with whom Circuit Judges PREGERSON, NOONAN, and O’SCANNLAIN join:

I join in Judge NOONAN’s dissent from the court’s failure to take this case en bane because I am in general agreement with it. However, I write separately in order to point out several additional errors in the panel’s opinion that are equally or more serious. Judge Noonan explains convincingly why the panel is mistaken when it concludes that the district court erred in its imposition of rebut-table presumptions because they “improperly shifted the burden of proof from Smyth to the government in contravention of the treaty…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-FonsecaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. Mihaly Kotasz, Agnes Horvath Kotasz, Matyas Kotasz, and Erika Kotasz v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
  3. Espectacion Bolanos-Hernandez v. Immigration & Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
  4. Elisida Zavala-Bonilla v. Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
  5. 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5875, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 10,012 in the Matter of the Requested Extradition of James Joseph Smyth. United States of America v. James Joseph SmythCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API