Rojas v. United States

How later courts describe this case

• finding that an excludable alien has “no constitutional right to be paroled into the United States, even if the only alternative is prolonged detention”
• “[T]here is no federal right to be free of the burden of proof in a retrospective state competency hearing.”
• “[Petitioner’s] contention that his attorneys were ineffec tive because they failed to attempt to prevent the use of his confession is the assertion of an alleged pre-plea constitutional violation[,] ... [which the court] will not consider ... in this habeas appeal.”
• consent to record telephone conversation