Disir
Platinum Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 28,003
- 9,607
- 910
CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The Supreme Court will hear the case of a former Akron woman deported last year after she and her husband were convicted of covering up their ties to war criminals in the Bosnian conflict in the 1990s to enter the U.S.
Divna Maslenjak was found guilty in 2014 of naturalization fraud and misuse of evidence of naturalization. U.S. District Judge Benita Pearson in Youngstown automatically revoked her citizenship, as required for a conviction of naturalization fraud.
Prosecutors say Divna Maslenjak lied to immigration authorities about her husband Ratko Maslenjak's role in the Bosnian conflict to enter the U.S. But Divna Maslenjak said the jury was not required to weigh the how important her statements were when she applied for U.S. citizenship in 2007, according to documents posted on SCOTUSblog.
Divna Maslenjak argues that the judge improperly stripped her of her citizenship following her convictions because the judge did so based on "immaterial" -- or less important -- statements. Courts have ruled in different ways across the country.
U.S. Supreme Court to hear case of former Akron woman deported over husband's Bosnian war crimes
Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit erred by holding, in direct conflict with the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 4th, 7th and 9th Circuits, that a naturalized American citizen can be stripped of her citizenship in a criminal proceeding based on an immaterial false statement.
Maslenjak v. United States - SCOTUSblog
This irritates me. Divna lied but it wasn't an important lie.
Divna Maslenjak was found guilty in 2014 of naturalization fraud and misuse of evidence of naturalization. U.S. District Judge Benita Pearson in Youngstown automatically revoked her citizenship, as required for a conviction of naturalization fraud.
Prosecutors say Divna Maslenjak lied to immigration authorities about her husband Ratko Maslenjak's role in the Bosnian conflict to enter the U.S. But Divna Maslenjak said the jury was not required to weigh the how important her statements were when she applied for U.S. citizenship in 2007, according to documents posted on SCOTUSblog.
Divna Maslenjak argues that the judge improperly stripped her of her citizenship following her convictions because the judge did so based on "immaterial" -- or less important -- statements. Courts have ruled in different ways across the country.
U.S. Supreme Court to hear case of former Akron woman deported over husband's Bosnian war crimes
Issue: Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit erred by holding, in direct conflict with the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the 1st, 4th, 7th and 9th Circuits, that a naturalized American citizen can be stripped of her citizenship in a criminal proceeding based on an immaterial false statement.
Maslenjak v. United States - SCOTUSblog
This irritates me. Divna lied but it wasn't an important lie.
