Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

jurisdictionappealmotiondeportationjudicial reviewpiracy
jurisdictionappealmotiondeportationjudicial reviewpiracy

Related Cases

Inc. v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
View Case »
Musunuru v. Holder
View Case »
Duron v. Johnson
View Case »
Vulupala v. Barr
View Case »
Pearson v. Rodriguez
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Stone v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Facts

Petitioner, Marvin Stone, a Canadian citizen, was ordered deported by an Immigration Judge after being convicted of conspiracy and mail fraud. Following the Immigration Judge's order, the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the decision, and Stone filed a motion to reopen or reconsider, which was denied as frivolous. After 17 months, he sought judicial review of the deportation order and the denial of his motion for reconsideration, but the court of appeals dismissed his motion for lack of jurisdiction, stating that the 90-day filing period had expired.

Petitioner, Marvin Stone, a Canadian citizen, was ordered deported by an Immigration Judge after being convicted of conspiracy and mail fraud. Following the Immigration Judge's order, the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the decision, and Stone filed a motion to reopen or reconsider, which was denied as frivolous.

Issue

Whether the filing of a timely motion for reconsideration of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals tolls the running of the 90-day period for seeking judicial review of the decision.

We consider whether the filing of a timely motion for reconsideration of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals tolls the running of the 90-day period for seeking judicial review of the decision.

Rule

The 90-day period for filing a petition for review of a final deportation order is not tolled by the filing of a motion for reconsideration.

The 90-day period for filing a petition for review of a final deportation order is not tolled by the filing of a motion for reconsideration.

Analysis

The Supreme Court analyzed the statutory framework governing deportation orders and the implications of filing a motion for reconsideration. It noted that the finality of a deportation order is established upon the dismissal of an appeal by the Board of Immigration Appeals, and that the timely filing of a motion for reconsideration does not affect this finality. The Court referenced previous cases that supported the conclusion that the filing of a reconsideration motion does not extend the time for seeking judicial review.

The Supreme Court analyzed the statutory framework governing deportation orders and the implications of filing a motion for reconsideration. It noted that the finality of a deportation order is established upon the dismissal of an appeal by the Board of Immigration Appeals, and that the timely filing of a motion for reconsideration does not affect this finality.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court, holding that the petitioner's motion to review a deportation order was properly denied for lack of jurisdiction, as it was not filed within the required 90-day period.

The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court, holding that the petitioner's motion to review a deportation order was properly denied for lack of jurisdiction, as it was not filed within the required 90-day period.

Who won?

The INS prevailed in the case because the Supreme Court upheld the lower court's ruling that the 90-day period for judicial review was not tolled by the filing of a motion for reconsideration.

The INS prevailed in the case because the Supreme Court upheld the lower court's ruling that the 90-day period for judicial review was not tolled by the filing of a motion for reconsideration.

You must be