Holding that "no deportation order may be entered unless it is found by clear, unequivocal, and convincing evidence that the facts alleged as grounds for deportation are true"
Holding that "the Supreme Court ruled that an alien did not have to be a permanent resident to harbor a lawful intent to remain. Thousands of aliens could become lawful domiciliaries without becoming permanent residents under Elkins."
Holding that two acts of oral copulation with a person under the age of sixteen committed one month apart were not part of a common scheme "[i]n the absence of evidence of a more conscious, coherent 'plan or program of future action'"
In Gonzalez-Sandoval, we reversed a BIA decision that relied on the First Circuit’s standard rather than the Wood standard in interpreting "single scheme."
Holding that two breaking and entering incidents that were separated by two days of time were not pursuant to a single scheme even though both may have occurred during a continuous drinking binge. The court equated "single scheme" with a "temporally integrated episode of continuous activity."
Holding that INS failed to prove that crimes of receiving stolen vehicle and stealing a different vehicle one day later were not part of a single scheme
In Wood, we rejected the BIA’s interpretation as "not what the statute says" because the BIA "applied the statute as if it read ‘single criminal act’ " rather than "single scheme of criminal misconduct."
In Chanan Din Kahn v Barber (253 F.2d 547), the court held that fraudulent filing of tax returns for two successive years were not crimes arising out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct.