Legal Opinion

Singh v. Attorney General of the United States

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Decided April 16, 2012No. 11-1988PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

VAN ANTWERPEN, Circuit Judge.

Nigel Singh petitions for review of a final order of removal based on his conviction, under 18 U.S.C. § 152(3), for knowingly making a false statement under pen alty of perjury in a bankruptcy proceeding. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) determined that Singh’s conviction was an offense involving fraud or deceit in which the loss to the victim exceeded $10,000, and hence an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i). In his petition, Singh argues that 18 U.S.C § 152(3) is a perjury offense that must meet the requirements for…

2Cases cited49 opinions

  1. Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  2. Shepard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  3. Perrin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Rubin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Hughey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. State of Iowa v. John Robert HoymanSupreme Court of Iowa · 2015
  2. Victor Frutis Salmoran v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
  3. Christopher Rad v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020
  4. Fan Wang v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
  5. Willy Rosa v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020

27 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