Legal Opinion · Concurrence

United States v. Jose Ochoa

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 3, 2017No. 15-10354Published

1Concurrence

GRABER, Circuit Judge,

with whom McKEOWN, Circuit Judge, and LYNN, Chief District Judge, join, concurring:

I concur in the opinion because it faithfully applies the law of our circuit. I write separately to express my view that our law with respect to the scope of collateral challenges under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d) has strayed increasingly far from the statutory text and that we are out of step with our sister circuits’ correct interpretation. For that reason, we should rehear this case en banc to correct our course.

The panel opinion sets forth the background of this case. I emphasize only one…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Leocal v. AshcroftSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. Frebert Bonhometre v. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States Immigration and Naturalization ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
  4. United States v. Jose Alfredo Pallares-GalanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
  5. United States v. Joel Lopez-OrtizCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2002

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