Legal Opinion
Luna v. Holder
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided March 3, 2011No. Docket 07-3796-ag, 08-4840-agPublishedCited by 57 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
POOLER, Circuit Judge:
The sole and exclusive means for challenging a final order of removal is to file a petition for review in a federal court of appeals. If a petition for review is filed more than 30 days after the order of removal, the court of appeals lacks jurisdiction over the petition. Here, Worklis Luna and Tasmann Anthony Thompson filed petitions for review after the 30-day deadline, alleging that their constitutional rights were violated because they were prevented from filing timely peti tions by ineffective assistance of counsel and governmental interference, respectively.…
2Cases cited47 opinions
- Bounds v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. St. CyrSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Nken v. HolderSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. VenturaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Xiao Ji Chen v. United States Department of Justice, Attorney General Alberto R. GonzalesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- Usama Hamama v. Rebecca AdducciCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
- Syed Tazu v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2020
- Wendy Osorio Martinez v. Attorney General United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
- Contreras-Bocanegra v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2012
- Prestol Espinal v. Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.