MLCommons/peoples_speech_v1.0 huggingface dataset:
and the circuit that in this case you'd have to conclude this was not categorically a crime of violence because there was nothing in the record to demonstrate that he was not convicted he was not pleading to a aiding and abetting theory  it's a it's a much closer question our knowledge after the supreme court decision but it does seem to me that the distinction i tend to draw in the reply brief is the correct one and that is that the question and that case was whether and more typical of a complicated issue i think is is the issue the court noted in advance with the chapman case it does seem to me that now quite clearly in the ninth circuit setting aside the aiding and abetting issue a conviction a statute would be a crime of violence and that if you could set aside aiding and abetting all you would need to prove a crime of violence would be an indictment saying you know list in the words of the statute and a plea of guilty and to actually strike out forcibly assault so the end lightman at that as it was written is not an accurate statement of the law in the ninth circuit so he there obviously was some kind of discussion with the government agreed to strike out that portion of the enticement so now all it's as is that my client was just as opposed so forth nothing about force and nothing about a school so we have the odd situation that now he was convicted based on an indictment that doesn't actually state a crime if you will and now under under chapman at the time of obviously is the case now under chapman either he had to something that isn't a crime or he should be found to have pled guilty the statute and now the statute  and the obvious conclusion that you know whether the government maybe was going to have some physical key proving the force aspect maybe that was where they compromised it seems to me that one should not be the latter i think your honor i wouldn't claim that somehow that should be vacated or something like that i just mean that given the uncertainty at the time and it seems like it would be unfair to impose the really is no basis to say that he did not nor do we have someone who's new to the system he had a prior conviction for part writing he had he was arrested when importing twenty seven twenty six pounds of marijuana involving moral turpitude that was proven and has never been challenged never not looking to prove the elements of the crimes were just looking it's his burden after that to prove his eligibility for release and let me ask one question in this case do we review just to be a or that's your honor that's one of those cases right yes your honor we don't we should be concerned with what weapon by car also could be used to get on the highway it's not clear to me that you couldn't be convicted under be one for fleeing in a car and it seems to me given that there is no evidence on the record deadly weapon that it's not a crime of violence i think there are instances your honor in which you could use deadly or what might be a deadly weapon in a non threatening manner or you still be
one of the tapes and there was no showing that he was in that involved with his drugs at that point so we think that clearly he was merely found in the perp promises which we we believe violates the u s he was clearly not involved in any of the major aspects of this case there are huge mess things happening with other defendants that he was involved with again not with the drugs work with johns nor
because you're saying what because you're saying that if you had been allowed to bring to use cabbage from foreign vessels that that would have a right to mean how why is it not just speculation
injury so everything is going along fine nobody's complaining about anything the claimant drops his hand to the floor he moves the ruling here in allegedly the chair went out from underneath them is that sort of what happened well what happened was he was filling out a form as he was required to do i guess he canceled the forms regarding robbing the trucks and what they were supposed to do he got off to get another form tasks in this case perhaps he was filling out paperwork people do that every day all through all through all white unit testing which he was specifically injured at the time he was sitting in an office chair and reaching for the record and so therefore and this is certainly not stand an increased neutral risk your honour's for these reasons and for the state in our brief i respectfully something that anybody dies i think those were his specific assignments that he was fulfilling at the time of the accident and that's why i say it was a risk related it was important
convictions in two thousand and six there were two burglary convictions and of gross sexual assault conviction but quarter found that it would count the burglary conviction st as three points and then and calculated it incorrectly so that would be it or whether there should have been another departure we would object to that disagree as well based on mr collins criminal history and i am not is your argument not enough because the quarter went through the analysis on the promise to carry category rule the way it did and then essentially as a throw away position said that well i would have upward departed anyway and found a criminal history category  the same the court never said it would oppose the same sentence either way perhaps that's and tried but there was no rationale or no other than a clue sharee statement that the criminal history category is better suited category four than category three the court in that case of the threat actually reach someone that could have been related to the person that was intended to get them the writer here the person brad never got the letter no one else got the letter they could've re respect to a sexual assault of a sexual girl when he was fifteen years old so i don't think that there is any basis to find that remember the perjury would not be supportable in this there was domestic issue with his mother when he was eighteen years old that he received ten days in jail when he was quite a young man and then he commits to serious offenses when he's twenty three but again those offenses are are the one he failed to register and got a fine in two thousand and sixteen which fairly places a criminal history category three enough or departure would have been an appropriate thank you and thank you
see in how you see it that had never been done it's not conventional it was a convention two thousand in both conventional two thousand and five it was an image shot in two thousand and nine it had nothing done we never got an opportunity for an expert witness says this whole lot of lies system has gone awry and i want all my clients can you focus on one very specific thing that is one of the claims and have you featured as claim have had an opportunity to present evidence as to why various features were or were and not some of them seem on their face not to be inventive such as using a particular industry court is that they were entitled to conduct discovery and make a factual showing as to why some of these features were not  innovative and the court there are all sorts of you know twenty different things are listed here on appeal some of them aren't even in the brief what i'm trying to get at his what exactly did they say that they wanted to so what we have is a game where they wanted to point out the of the novelty of the combination of elements not individual element so they're not going to stand up here and say they came up with a new method of streaming they came up with a new i mean i understood just like to ask you for a specific description of a specific fact that you told the district judge you wanted to put in evidence and take discovery exactly what is that the state of the
one of the most ruthless exhibitions of savage trade the world of ever seen over thirty thousand men women and children were killed in the space of ninety minutes the list six months engineer battalion are working together as a well trained team they knew exactly where to cross the river no school today is the sign set for children or otherwise occupied no no school today
why doesn't that fall within the ninth circuit case law that basically suggests that in this case congress could retroactively apply the aggravated expand the definition of an aggravated felony to include the fact that even if  have been eligible for two twelve c relief at that point because it is as far as heene understood it didn't apply to him yes your honor but his reliance on the fact that he would not be removed at  think is a very serious factor was even more serious then but that's not answering my question i think the problem is with the language and the holdings of our cases and which of course we're bound by as a three judge panel we don't have the authority to overrule another three judge panel decision and i'm trying to ask maybe not very artfully but i'd like your help in telling us how you think we can distinguish those cases that seem to have approved the is a little circular here miss evans he wasn't eligible for two trials the relief effort time that he entered the plea so how could he have an expectation that he could avail himself of to twelve c relief at that time understand that that's what the leon has panelists said but let's look at the facts of the two cases maybe you can address it from an attempt to distinguish it on the facts because it seems to me that your client is in the same situation as  and our case as we have today this this defendant didn't do any of those things and he had one one offense only and he did not but in both cases the offenses as a result of my rear became came an is just like the last of the dino i think that the other argument that was being nicknamed was that two twelve h should be applied that was not an argument that was made to be  a and i don't think that i have not seen any facts to support eligibility that's that's in our brief that we don't even get to the legal question but i think that's where the point was arguing leon todd's might apply c and that the argument regarding to twelve h apart from the fact that the argument was not made to the p r i there's no eligibility no there's no factual basis  this court stated that changed it would have been available to him even before sincerer there were some other changes before that so the law misinformed him because i mean there were many lauri's when systems insisted on filing and there was some argument in common apple versus
on the issue of jurisdiction the medina morale is case controls why because the board's decision in this case is a decision regarding a motion to remain it is not a judgment regarding relief under  alice the court distinguish between a discretionary aspect of denial versus the denial of the discretionary relief because there are also discretionary issues involved in that in that case as well as the board said it is the decision the requirements are essentially the same and don't forget we have to add that there is a strong presumption in favor of judicial review of the ministry of action since your case plus the a long cruelty the county of san diego substantiated that there is a there that was emotional abuse of the daughter of sam the discord in the hernandez case ruled that extreme cruelty in cruise includes mental or psychological abuse and because this statute isn't a mere chip statute it should be interpreted and applied in an in a military fashion and on the issue of hardship board didn't address specifically any one of those factors and that in itself should be enough for  the circuit at that there is no jurisdiction to review a judgment regarding the discretionary relief the cancellation of removal what that means is a decision on the discretionary factor of extreme hardship versus a determination as to like the and extremely unusual hardship and that that has been interviewed by the board to be a serious medical issue or a compelling special needs school this is extreme hardship
anybody finds something a bit like the variety of things that happen between the folk music and the chamber consciousness protruding is enough that it can fit into anybody's plans tend to attract a rather circumscribed clientele there are a group of cool people on campus not meaning it derogatorily but just people who consider the twinging and if you consider yourself know you just have to go to the coffee house for one reason or another it's the place to be and the place to be seen the money from the coffee shop was originally founded by the school in this was organized by the school and the original money was put up by the school about a year and a half ago we started the coffee house and it grew naturally from using entertainment on sunday evening and then it became a coffee house on friday evening for the adults of the church and a desire on my part to speak to the community and to involve the community in some kind of dialogue or communication twice a month every second and fourth friday evening we transform our social hall into an actual coffee house setting with small tables and circles of chairs and a spotlight on the entertainment and then high school girls serve the refreshments coffee don't come back because it's pretty hard to change people's ideas that quickly but the rhythm coffeehouse isn't a sort of an organization it's simply run as a coffee house and since people realize it they don't hesitate to come back enjoy themselves time  i truly think that if the church is going to get out into the world and make a better place of it especially for the use that they are going to have to offer something to be used on their own level i think this is the only was going to be a success but when i first came i realized that it was going to be real good a real good place for kids to come the idea of the coffee house and to just kind of change that it's really like that again well i think the brother and coffee house is a great place i've been amazed at the response to the brother in coffeehouse here and gone dale the interest has been overwhelming from people across the country from churches and other groups as well and so the coffee house idea and the folk singing is in keeping with the times and does speak to life in a very meaningful way
had shown and proven that it was more likely than not that he be tortured killed the future moved to mexico however the immigration judge also found that because the the family that control the areas of the to relocate and the fact is that the petitioner had lived in mexico since he was two years old and has no family there the family that was there have all been killed by them and then tell family and so it would under the circumstances it would not be issues when it is a question of law or where and when a constitutional violation has rights the constitution we wonder every alien without going through move proceedings has the right to due process and equal protection every case would be a constitutional case because every case in which you disagree with the immigration judge because immigration judge would be making factual findings based on his or her perception of the facts and i'm i'm still having  ready for another round ok all right i would agree your honor that based upon that broad theory that it would destroy the whole situation but the point here is that there was no evidence in the record there was nothing produce the petitioner from the put the mexican police turf and to me that's implying as if the petitioner came to live in an area that's supposedly controlled by another drug cartel and expect that drug cartel jewish sure and that's the point is that who knows why he didn't make the argument you're making now i'm sorry who is that the father where you want if you read the testimony of the father the father obviously is of limited education because many of us represent the sponsors are i know  knows that was the answer and that provides the substantial evidence for the finding that the witness the son could live anywhere in mexico he wanted to outside of baja california it's a factual question that's all it is  this morning well how does that become a question of law is another factual question and that's my response that i don't hear it to be a question of law it's easy to say that if you
that you take your school work seriously couldn't you manage to arrange your time for you could have a little fun too i have a certain amount of homework to do i like to get done on time but you have a whole week you could go out on friday night or have somebody in your life then is that what you mean having a good time is all i mean and that's why i talked to ron's mother   think you should go you're only young once you know sooner or you'll be so corny nobody over there i want to see it was who came over here every day and read to you by the hour we sure mom but she changed since the home now ron i don't think she's really changed why don't you give her a chance color tomorrow thanks them you know growing up brings different problems to different people and some where they just don't quite bring it off without falling down some where well if you ask me for sarah fell down was when she went to junior high and when she was in grade school she she was well can make good grades and had lots of friends but when she started going to junior high with lots of other sharp kids she could be a big wheel now she's in senior high school it's too bad it seems well you know it sounds like she needs a friend here nominate me i don't know she may cut me dead she does lots of other people and i don't think she cares at all i'm sorry you don't like so many people friends are important in this world you should encourage others to make good and not dislike them for i think maybe your mother is right i think you should go to ron's get together this friday try to like people for whatever they are act the way she does is it a cover up for some lack she feels in herself can a friend like ron help her in any way is the group justified in judging everything
right scratched it all that's a good idea jim i'll begin today after school that will be fine well what else do you want me to do mr edmund perhaps you can help me with a problem i'd like  advice jim my advice as i've got quite a serious problem there are a great many young people in the school gym each is an individual but in one important way they are all alike they're all growing up is that the problem mr edmunds yes growing up is a problem because i remember one time i watched some of the boys play ball you probably seen it too the boys were all about your age in years or young men but sometimes in their behavior they acted children at the boys batting struck out and the mates he was a young man in years but the way he behaved was more in keeping with the five year old when you see a child do the same thing you think oh well he'll grow up sometime but at fifteen or sixteen this boy was still reacting the same way he was still showing violent temper when little things went wrong for him so the question is why doesn't he grow ops why does the still behave wit the child it's how can we help him get rid of the leftovers from childish behavior it's that sort of behavior we call an infant our reaction infants well whatever it is and spoils the understand just why oh it's partly because of the way we grow up your buddies growing up now jim you're growing much taller these years but it may be some years more before your shoulders really broaden out and you become fully grown growing up emotionally as much the same different part about personal growth at different rates some of us never grow up tired so one side of the fellows personality could be growing up in another still infant child is that right yes for example you've seen the girl who always has to win an argument most of the time she behaves like a young lady but let someone disagree with the r she might just as well be five years old we see reactions like this with young children there is no boy who constantly shows up to gain attention there's a girl who cries over trival then remember it was the ballplayer who becomes violently angry when he loses just some of the many infant our reactions we feel around us every day to indicate that a part of one's personality isn't growing up with the right now what we need is some method of measuring our growth comparing various parts of our let's see how old am i when someone disagrees with me wait until in prague spring a leak when i want attention when i am confused well i'll have to work hard to bring my rating up here for instance where how old am i when i don't get what i want i rated myself ten years old in my idea for that even lower than  trying going to get in the habit of controlling my temper and maybe next month i'll have a better writing then by next year i want to catch up with my real age that's something to look forward to i'll say well i'm not going to tell you all my writing but i thought you
that's my great for commercial gain or for commercial advantage for private financial gain that there is no requirement to prove that couch that there be payment actual payment or expected payment you can show th three well yes i might i might but i guess what we're one is to go if we want to go back to the court i'm not modify categoric approach and the reason i really for me without seeing that agreement this really wasn't sort of an academic exercise
for her to continue working in the us it's my belief that if she had entered into a sham marriage that she would have gone about it perhaps more prudent matter in terms of the petition she  person that person play which came into the country the woman testified that for approximately approximately two years she was being paid in thai currency because she thought it was normal your honour's general her husband problems he's he's he testified that the times when he did work he would work approximately two to four hours or two to four hours a day he would get paid under the table so there wouldn't be interview to the involved there in terms up in ninety i'm sorry that they were married in eighty nine in ninety two they both testified that he had gone to lose the and so he could be with his sick mother subsequently died unfortunately got the period of time and that he was gone wrong but they testified consistently with that they testified that he returned and they separated in ninety five because he had a drinking problem and then they testified that he they got back together in ninety eight when they got back together in ninety eight this was a few months before before they found the seven fifty one before i believe the petitioner knew that there was going to be a possibility that she would be denied and that she would and that she would be ordered deported so it's my contention that