Chen (not precedential): No Violation For Government's Expert Not To Produce Data Where Still Possible To Cross-Examine Methods
Chen v. Holder
November 10, 2009
Not Precedential
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/081614np.pdf
For Mr. Chen, Marco Pignone, III of Getson & Schatz in Philadelphia argued the case. For the government, Paul Fiorini argued the case and also on the case was Richard M. Evans of OIL.
Judges Rendell, Ambro, and District Court Judge Terrence F. McVerry. Judge Rendell issued the decision. Upheld the BIA and IJ Rosalind K. Malloy.
It did not violate due process for the government's expert not to reveal her notes or to refer to documents that Mr. Chen wished to challenge. This is because Mr. Chen was nevertheless able to cross-examine the expert about her methodology and findings.
November 10, 2009
Not Precedential
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/081614np.pdf
For Mr. Chen, Marco Pignone, III of Getson & Schatz in Philadelphia argued the case. For the government, Paul Fiorini argued the case and also on the case was Richard M. Evans of OIL.
Judges Rendell, Ambro, and District Court Judge Terrence F. McVerry. Judge Rendell issued the decision. Upheld the BIA and IJ Rosalind K. Malloy.
It did not violate due process for the government's expert not to reveal her notes or to refer to documents that Mr. Chen wished to challenge. This is because Mr. Chen was nevertheless able to cross-examine the expert about her methodology and findings.
posted by Rex at 9:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home