No. 20-6195
Erlin Josue Torres Zuniga v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: administrative-adjudication administrative-agency-adjudication civil-procedure collateral-estoppel criminal-defendant due-process immigration-law jurisdiction jurisdictional-requirement notice-to-appear removal-proceedings
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Immigration JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw DueProcess Immigration JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2020-12-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether and under what circumstances the government may invoke collateral-estoppel against-a-criminal-defendant based-on-a-prior-administrative-agency-adjudication
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION PRESENTED I. Whether and under what circumstances the government may invoke collateral estoppel against a criminal defendant based on a prior administrative agency adjudication. I. Whether ITRIRA 309(¢), stating that a notice under 8 U.S.C. § 1229(a) “confer[s] jurisdiction on the immigration judge” is a “clear statement” that Congress intended the service of a Notice to Appear to be jurisdictional — that is, a condition on the exercise of an immigration judge’s authority to enter orders of removal.
Docket Entries
2020-12-07
Petition DENIED.
2020-11-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 12/4/2020.
2020-11-06
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2020-10-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 3, 2020)
Attorneys
Erlin Torres Zuniga
Joseph Stephen Camden — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
Joseph Stephen Camden — Office of the Federal Public Defender, Petitioner
United States of America
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent