FlawCheck Citator
Check how courts have cited this case. Use our free citator for the most current treatment.
No. 8622144
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Nedd v. Chertoff

No. 8622144 · Decided June 16, 2006
No. 8622144 · Ninth Circuit · 2006 · FlawFinder last updated this page Apr. 2, 2026
Case Details
Court
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided
June 16, 2006
Citation
No. 8622144
Disposition
See opinion text.
Full Opinion
MEMORANDUM *** Steve Richard Nedd, a native and citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition, challenging the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order finding him removable and denying him relief from deportation under Section 212(c) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (“INA”) due to his guilty-plea conviction of possessing cocaine for sale in violation of California Health and Safety Code § 11351. In accordance with Alvarez-Barajas v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 1050, 1053 (9th Cir. 2005), we construe Nedd’s habeas petition as if it were a timely-filed petition for review with this court. We deny the petition. Nedd contends that the Immigration Judge violated his due process rights by retroactively applying the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”) and the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”) to deny him relief under INA § 212(c). It is undisputed that Nedd entered his guilty plea to the predicate offense *597 after the effective date of AEDPA, at a time when he was not eligible for § 212(c) relief. Thus, the denial of such relief was not impermissibly retroactive. Cf. INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 325-26 , 121 S.Ct. 2271 , 150 L.Ed.2d 347 (2001) (holding that IIRIRA and AEDPA are not applicable to criminal alien who entered a guilty plea at a time when alien was eligible for § 212(c) relief). Nedd further contends that the application of § 440(d) of AEDPA to him violated his equal protection rights pursuant to Servin-Espinoza v. Ashcroft, 309 F.3d 1193 (9th Cir.2002). However, that decision only applies to aliens who were ordered deported between May 14, 1997, and June 7, 1999. Here, Nedd was deemed removable by the IJ on August 19, 2002, and this decision was affirmed by the BIA on December 31, 2002. Therefore, Servin-E spinoza is not controlling. PETITION DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Plain English Summary
MEMORANDUM *** Steve Richard Nedd, a native and citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C.
Key Points
Frequently Asked Questions
MEMORANDUM *** Steve Richard Nedd, a native and citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment denying his 28 U.S.C.
FlawCheck shows no negative treatment for Nedd v. Chertoff in the current circuit citation data.
This case was decided on June 16, 2006.
Use the citation No. 8622144 and verify it against the official reporter before filing.
Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Why Attorneys Choose FlawFinder

Side-by-side with Westlaw and LexisNexis

Feature FlawFinder Westlaw LexisNexis
Monthly price$19 – $99$133 – $646$153 – $399
ContractNone1–3 year min1–6 year min
Hidden fees$0, alwaysUp to $469/search$25/mo + per-doc
FlawCheck citatorIncludedKeyCite ($$$)Shepard's ($$$)
Plain-English summaryIncludedNoNo
CancelOne clickTermination feesAccount friction
Related Cases

Full legal research for $19/month

All 50 states · Federal regulations · Case law · Police SOPs · AI analysis included · No contract

Continue Researching →