MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
thing this case began with a number of issues then we now narrowed down as time has passed the issue initially for us was whether two twelve h would be available that he would be arrested that he would suffer harm and he proceeded to testify to that but your client father himself has gone back to india on several occasions just scenario that your client will return to india but just not to the same region i think that's a real difficult question for us to respond to to the extent of the can i think that in some instances you may have an individual even today that is granted to them from a particular country and they may at some point return to that country and because they are outside of that one specific area they  be able to avoid arrest harassment physical abuse but it may be made it may be more a matter of luck than it is something that that they can plan on each and every time  i mean that's what you would need to find that the whole country can't be considered to be safe to return and none of that is present in this record correct i would i think that is correct we do not i'm not certain i'm not certain that i would but i would be inclined to agree that the standard has to be that there is absolutely no safe place in the of the manner in which we distinction but the more important that your honor is that the district court in this case lacks haiti's jurisdiction over this cat claim because in this cat claim there was nothing more than an attempt to limited review of the scope of argument it is limited to constitutional and statutory claims so what we're saying is the court simply does not need to reach the question that arose potentially or arguably in the he has jurisdiction wise over a challenge to in that case discretionary belief in the court stated quote we remain convinced that he gave us review under section twenty two forty one is limited only to claims of constitutional or statutory what i mean again the first is with respect to the particularly serious crime i think that that is an easy determination but separate from the cat claim in the particular serious crime issue watcher stiction over that claim now turning to the separate and distinct issue of cat we understand that there is there is an issue as to whether and the second immigration judge that is what the district court refused and i think a proper application of the statute before the immigration judge what interpretation was given by those who have to make out either a due process or equal protection claim out of that i mean if it's more than just an interpretation of a lot right completely for us and being able to raise these questions for review with the district court thank you thank you for your time has expired the case just argued will be submitted for
not if the commentary is inconsistent with or a plainly erroneous reading of the guidelines and what we have a situation where application note eight says that something that the guideline itself says is relevant conduct is not re that and what's more the application code eight itself at the end says in situations where the individuals charged with a conspiracy that in fact we're going to ignore this rule in the first part of application  be too long and others are not i think going to your i understand your hypothetical fairly that would be too much time but seven months is not so much time this court's decision will lars in which the individual was arrested and november yes in november and the relevant context so i think that my answer to your next question is that i would apply the same relevant conduct analysis that is applied across the board to decide whether or not that gap is too long ten years it's too long but  well i think that that i would go back to the plain language of the guideline itself which says that it shouldn't matter if you charge as a bad guy i understand that there is a difference in terms of the charge and you know if you mention it as an overt act then it's obviously a charge in the new offense but that should make a difference in terms of calculating relevant pro convictions and had actually suffered so i think they clearly intended for some people and mr july first position to actually be able to take advantage of this particular rule and see the extent that application load eight to one being one point three affectively prevent prosecutors for example for sure you can fry may if they've got a and b they can charge you both and committed but they do them separately in order to increase the purse or to get a different firms when you were good and  gave you charging together and relevant time to take care of us here there's no such problem because the person has already been charged with the only crime is to be charged with convicted of the only trying to could be convicted with and now is on how to commit
from the bag and he could not see the face of the identification in the store or involved grades that's why i think it's significant but mr brown right is someone that mr hawkins the distinction between the grand jury testimony and the statements of the police because this instruction that you say should have been given mid trial would have told the jury now some of this is just impeachment meaning either of the substantive evidence could be a reasonable defense attorneys say i don't want to call attention to them well in trying to and understand when i when i look at the prosecutor's closing argument in totality her up i didn't understand her to be lumping them all to she was explaining impeachment to that yuri and  told them it was for them to saturday which statement you believe correct but i think they should read the jury should have more guidance than just the men's on the jury instruction and i understand it was  he testified he had seen previously for a couple times a week for several months in this thing that was in the store as a customer yes or no he didn't he just saw the back of the shooter never saw the shooter  is also diving under a table as i understand it or over a table and trying to get out going to fire trying to protect himself and this is a customer that he seen before in the store as a customer try it was someone that had previously frequented this right and that's why he was able to identify him that day of the shooting when he turned and saw the individual he didn't identify and he said i thought it was him he did say it was him he said i thought it was him yes or no but he did tendon shots when this individual entered the store or he saw them at the front of the story wearing jeans a black hoodie a mask carrying a really big gun and that he was able to see the eyes of this individual when he entered the store in addition  led to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did commit the murders in this case what about the closing argument in which the prosecutor tries to define impeachment despite the rod in in this particular in this particular case where was she suggesting that if somebody made an inconsistent statement on a previous occasion that it's thing and consistent statement that the jury believe that the testimony was to be considered in a way that the jury was to was to review it the fact that there was not this prior contemporaneous of counsel furthermore the it will contemporaneous instruction is merely suggested by the many notes of the instruction it's not something that is even legally required therefore the fact that that will contemporaneous instruction was not given was absolutely not reversible error in this case and the prosecution statements outlining that were also p the said no it wasn't worth of the defense then there's who did say less she was with mr brown when he received the call the state then put on a detective to say that
surgery in you discovered by the if on the other hand is totally independent the next particular case he has a right to recover but the commission found in this particular case i just because the doctor says yeah this could do it but in my opinion he didn't so why keep the commission believes the it didn't part is opposed to relying on it cooler to work the benefits
to the council who will be arguing today we look forward to the time hopefully some time soon when we can all do this person again we are very grateful in the meantime for our staff who has really helped this court keep up with its workload almost uninterrupted during this during this pandemic in the meantime we hope that everyone is safe and sound we as a during your argument you please watch your time keep your  was the victim's injuries in this case and that's just not what the record is in this matter in this case the victim on the daily that she went to or she was able to work she was able to lift however they did testify but that was unrelated dr chris it was all related he didn't even know about it but the bad bit this injury is related is demonstrated st by the victim's testimony that she felt victim highly disrespected in his opinion does telling the jury he had loaded and then he was absolutely incredible testimony where he st testifies that he did not hold a detention hearing officer
i believe motion pictures but motion pictures i believe are the motion pictures in people's minds and a motion picture as we term it is is merely a means of putting motion pictures in people's more they may be more stimulated from an emotional standpoint they may be more realistic but if you're dealing with one another situation and you can documentary and i know of your attraction to the kind of man the medicine was and i recall that you had a great deal to do with the presentation of one of the early documentary films on it li yes i learned a great deal from town madison i wrote a page story on it one of the series of interviews that i had with their business leaders outstanding personalities of that time particularly inventors people of new ideas i well really following up some of the suppressed desires that i had of my father's family table when i was  madison i learned a good deal and i wanted the third helping so i went down and went to find out what he then considered his greatest with which was a presentation of factual material like the pressure of newspaper publicity we had demonstrated that people were also interested in the facts of life t i always love to learn
shift after doe's for a request that in a span of four years month the company made an analysis and then human resources manager in the position at present very poor evidence in the record that in fact that is a fundamental of your functions for assistance many judges additional questions  supervisors describe him in the following manner mr silas is a strong man
gives the residents a chance to to a little bit more about the dental practice is that when you go when you get your teeth cleaned or whatever and you go home and you don't really think about exactly that is a business which in fact is a very  very important small business so why did you pick don't want to open your practice is an interesting question i lived in belmont since i was twenty years old and during college undergrad during was available right above me on it used to belong to a dentist we had practiced there for years and he had left the practice so i took over the space leon offered me the space i took over the space  started very small with two chairs whopper tori's very small office probably four hundred square feet or less and after four years i expanded into a fourteen hundred square foot office which is and also it gives us a pleasure or you know when you see your make up somebody smile when you make over somebody smile give them a great smile give them that confidence that goes with that smile and of course gives you a lot of satisfaction if i would have a video put on how what is that more much beautiful and pleasant now you were part of the united states were born and i was born in beirut lebanon in beirut lebanon and i came to this country when i was nineteen years old ok and when he did high school and i  and i did that for initially three days a week and eventually as my practice grew i reduced it to one day into a half a day and after thirteen years of teaching i basically took a leave of absence  since it was getting very very busy at my practice and never went back even though there's always an opportunity to go back at some point and do teaching because it's very very fulfilling very satisfying now feeling if i actual dentists professors who teach terror and under supervision data a wonderful job and of course there it's more affordable special for people who don't have insurance and people with limited funds and a lot of work right and we try to understand their needs you know their concerns and basically we cater to wards people who you know we have the past twenty plus years i've involve myself in church a lot of charitable work in terms of bringing dentistry western dentistry western style dentistry to armenia what got me interested in that was the earthquake initially when it happened after the earthquake there was a lot of need of medical aid and i thought for a long time to bring myself into the picture and we continuously go back and forth back and forth we have some other colleagues here in boston who do the same and we take turns going in training them and bringing material western style you know  which of the sixty was sixteen thousand people you'd expect five or six that it's exactly that it also depends where we do western culture absolutely if it depends where it is but you know there's we have a little bit more than that you know dentists and in this country you know we have the luxury of development business report and thank you i'm glad the residents of bell when a chance to meet you at least on the show and hopefully if you're looking for a dentist stop by and see doctor
counsel staggered to anticipate our holding in the lead but had not yet been decided on the defense counsel was performing his duties and i don't understand how it can be ineffective president should be and it is and adding that definition into the sentencing guidelines i think led to the analysis let's say that a whole series of litigation with respect to the to  possible or potential use of prior burglary convictions for sensing purposes now in this case in particular the pre sentence report there was actually there's an underlying problem and that is doesn't fit the enhancement you're saying he should've looked at the supreme court case that says you take the definition in the statute rather than looking at the specific facts of the case side that a mere nine months after the sentencing was imposed in this case should have counsel the mayor and the nine don't really affect me if the after that catches my attention i understand your but if this determination had been made and this challenge had been made and ruled adversely to the defendant in this case certainly an appeal is entirely reasonable and that appeal would have been pending at the time that you w burglaries application under taylor taylor with settled law taylor was supreme court precedent at the time it had been on the books for a broad nine years and the cases that have looked at that also came from other circuits i believe one may have come from the seventh circuit and i believe one came from the fifth circuit both both of course were decided after this district after this individual was finished of course but you point out the first time that the  the burglary as defined at eleven zero one eight forty three g should include analysis as dana taylor now taylor was strictly let's just look a look at the statute as a subsequent case law developed it talked about doing  the prior crime was the judge can look at the pre sentence report in the present criminal case the the case that i believe them and may be discussed and potter and they  record indicates that was just one of the things that he asked the court to do i don't think that that was the sole reason why he asked for the objection that he has everything that's in the record that i have before me and that the court has of course self i believe simply says that  and what she said that he that he had taken on the basis of being considered an aggravated felony he my understanding is that in my reading of the record is that his his objection was kind of brought on what he didn't do was that he didn't state taylor he didn't state taylor but what he did do was he did objectives as a judge among other things number one this this this is not really a aggravated felony that he should get a bump this and this doesn't constitute what they were what he thought of he just didn't say the der as the statute indicates as the government counsel points out and we pointed out is so broad and so general that under taylor's categorical approach it mean i think cannot be used as an enhancement at the time that he was  applied at the time the killer was already decided tailor dictated and tailor in this case to case to remain
secondly the canine search and third the search of the magnetic strip of my client's credit cards and just so the core of those there were three stocks here but i'm only concerned with the one in ohio on the tober second two some been no drug citations one justification was the fact that they came from new york to ohio from millions of people come from new york to ohio and there are other expectation of privacy he laskin to challenge the search of the vehicle campbell is another good example where this court that was a credit card access device case as well cars were seized from the glove box he's presented to us this morning the dog certain chicken in credit card search of the magnetic strip he could pursue them better our position is they would go nowhere from that threshold  or in this case we said bit the cards which were secret even remind mr palmeiro or somebody else we don't really know who is underneath that corner of the spare tire in the trunk certainly a location where hilarious with that information which is also exactly what should be involved in front of the card says the cases we had so yes i think that there is arguably a very large distinction between the contents of a cell phone california drivers from new york they're heading to ohio when all comes back to the car and he has as the district court pointed out then there are these are things going on with the rental agreements the car yes some of the my recollection maybe some of the numbers i think correspond with the with the ones on the card and this trip and the first seven did if you're seventeen all and then others did
that flame was exhausted your honor could you could you point to me in the record where it shows that that particular claim was examined failure to accommodate a perceived disability he was put on administrative leave on november seventeen is twofold first of all he applied for a maintenance position in another post of building in the silver mines hannah that application was made in april of one nine hundred ninety eight he made that application because  his kids the physical limitations that he was suffering as a result of a whole series of injuries that you suffered while working at at the post office now we can stand that he suffered a large number of these injuries because of unsafe conditions but it really doesn't make any difference under the rehabilitation act whether these limitations are of the result of injuries to the unsafe conditions brought back one of the conditions was better he would not have contact with postmaster johnson and of course he did have contact with postmaster general of the one nine hundred ninety nine and the well he ari but i think an adverse job action because he is perceived to be just a vault then he does have a client and we were not allowed to argue that on the motion for summary judgment as we sell to the court's decision granting a judgment on the pleadings with respect to my my brief was simply not very responsive to his and i don't think i'm i think i think we would we've been on the scavenger hunt and i missed the car i missed i didn't find the price the complaint came in  old mr gore through unsafe working conditions have harassed them for complaining about unsafe working conditions allegation yeah but they're out i gather especially from the argument today is that he didn't form timely he didn't timely contact the counselor he never responds to that the district judge didn't could hear him but didn't grant summary judgment on the reason he didn't own the on process and in response to that he asked the court to conduct a scavenger hunt he dumped in pages of documents and i'm pretty sure that the claim that we sent him home is in there but for a lot of that we didn't have to accommodate a perceived disability and there was no evidence along with the fable i would say that that's not a reasonable accommodation either that or to say that the postmaster has to stay on the failure to accommodate with respect to the perceived disability the ninth circuit last clear on that we are contending that he has in fact suffered financial damages as a result of being put on administrative leave that has to do with the loss of over time he
early marriage so the country reports indicate that people who are under age are not allowed to contract legally binding marriage in china which is what he testified to she was under age and was not allowed to legally marry her another point  have the children not have the children is not really what the chinese government based on conditions is looking into are you a child or a woman who's going to cause us you know to overflow our population that's the issue so the fact that she's already gone ahead and got a bomb had more children actually would seem to indicate that she is somebody who has the inclination to continue to bury children there by making the government more likely to go ahead and want to sterilize  china she has no children so that it cannot be almost heartless saying there's no way the chinese government needs to know about you two children which assumes that the two children are being left in the united states for that was the this seems to be the assumed state of the record that she can take those own terms to rule out all variables and in this case her testimony winds up pretty well with that saying the same as you are under age husband because he got but that does not compel the conclusion that the events happened as she described them in one way but the point is he did nothing to help her claim her problems later contradicted her claims a and yes right and again this court has recognized in the first and here and reliability of the statements taken at the airport when people come here to the airport the circumstances under which they survive the circumstances lend themselves to all kinds of things happening so you cannot to twenty six to twenty seven