United States v. Wong Kim Bo, A/K/A Yee Kuk Ho, Etc.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
1Per curiam
By Petition for Rehearing the government strenuously urges that the original opinion in this case, 466 F.2d 1298, was in error in imputing such critical importance to the words “arrested and” in 8 U.S.C.A. § 1326. “The simple, and correct, answer,” the government suggests, “ * * * is that the term ‘arrested and’ in the statute is now meaningless. * * * It is, indeed, surplusage.” Petition for Rehearing at page 9.
To support this curious assertion, the government argues three points. First, it is pointed out that previous decisions have virtually ignored the “arrested and” language of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Malat v. RiddellSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Francisco Pena-Cabanillas v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1968
- Mrvica v. EsperdySupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Fermin Arriaga-Ramirez v. United States of America, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1963
- United States v. Wong Kim Bo, A/K/A Yee Kuk Ho, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by391 opinions
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-FonsecaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. White Consolidated Industries, Inc., C/o Ct Corporation Systems Registered AgentCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
- Russello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Clay v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Boumediene v. BushSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
386 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.