Skip to content
Asylum BeaconU.S. immigration court data
← All judges

Judge Wilson, Earle B

MIAMI — IMMIGRATION COURT

No hearings scheduled ahead

Last hearing
October 7, 2024
Next hearing
none scheduled
Last decision
October 7, 2024
Courts worked at: 13

Worked here before

The periods overlap, and that is not an error: a judge hears cases at a new court while still closing out old ones at the previous one. Each row answers "when did this judge work here", not "from when to when did they serve here".

Status is derived from the court calendar: whether the judge has hearings scheduled after the release cutoff. The EOIR release carries no personnel data, so retirement, removal, elevation to the BIA and extended absence cannot be told apart — only what the data shows is stated here. Hearings are scheduled two to three years out, so an empty calendar for a working judge is rare; for judges who went quiet in the last few months it may still be an artifact of the cutoff, which lags by about a month. The lookup table's "active" flag is not used: it disagrees with the calendar for a third of judges.

10%

Asylum grant rate

of 3,170 decisions · FY1992–FY2021

95% interval: 9% — 11%

granted:
313
denied:
2,857

The period has closed

This judge no longer hears cases, so the figure describes FY1992–FY2021 — not what happens in the court today. Asylum rules and the mix of cases have changed since.

How this percentage is calculated
Grant rate = granted / (granted + denied). Administrative closures, withdrawals, abandonment and "not adjudicated" are excluded from the denominator. The unit of count is a decision per proceeding, not per application: applicants almost always file asylum, withholding and CAT protection together. Withholding and CAT grants are counted separately from asylum. U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

How this compares

  • This judge10% (3,170)
  • The whole court — MIAMI — IMMIGRATION COURT19% (104,037)
  • All U.S. courts33% (1,350,724)

This comparison does not adjust for which cases a judge was given: judges see different nationalities, different shares of detained respondents, and different rates of legal representation. A difference in percentages does not by itself mean identical cases were treated differently.

Trend by fiscal year

0%25%50%75%100%20062010201320162019

U.S. fiscal year: October 1 – September 30.

Years with fewer than 10 decisions are not plotted (8): at that sample size the percentage is noise. They remain in the table.

Show as a table
Grant rate by fiscal year
Perioddecisionsgranted95% interval
FY20191254%2% — 9%
FY20182635%3% — 8%
FY20172993%2% — 6%
FY20164632%1% — 3%
FY20151310%0% — 3%
FY2014544%1% — 13%
FY2013790%0% — 5%
FY20121157%4% — 13%
FY2011646%2% — 15%
FY201014421%15% — 28%
FY200934419%15% — 24%
FY200834620%16% — 25%
FY200734517%13% — 21%
FY200638211%8% — 14%
FY200440%0% — 49%
FY200310%0% — 79%
FY200110%0% — 79%
FY199950%0% — 43%
FY199810%0% — 79%
FY199610%0% — 79%
FY199520%0% — 66%
FY199310%0% — 79%

By applicant nationality

Grant rate by nationality, largest volumes first
Nationalitydecisionsgranted95% interval
HAITI61515%13% — 18%
GUATEMALA4723%2% — 5%
COLOMBIA38416%12% — 20%
HONDURAS2862%1% — 5%
EL SALVADOR2800%0% — 1%
MEXICO2510%0% — 2%
VENEZUELA21514%10% — 19%
CHINA8531%22% — 41%
ALBANIA400%0% — 9%
NICARAGUA370%0% — 9%
INDIA340%0% — 10%
RUSSIA3330%17% — 47%
PERU3126%14% — 43%
NIGERIA250%0% — 13%
BANGLADESH258%2% — 25%

How long a case takes

How long it took from service of the NTA to the decision on the application, for the cases this judge has already finished.

22 mo

median

half of cases: 10—37 mo

based on 3,170 cases

NTA-to-decision duration by fiscal year
Decided inCasesmedianhalf of cases, mo
FY20191255 mo4—6
FY201826321 mo13—36
FY201729912 mo9—17
FY20164639 mo7—12
FY20151318 mo6—14
FY2014543 mo2—20
FY2013793 mo2—5
FY201211517 mo9—37
FY20116426 mo16—64
FY201014434 mo23—54

Duration runs from the NTA date (charging document served) to the decision on the application. Median, not mean: the distribution has a long right tail. Cases decided this year may have begun a decade ago, so duration by year of decision is not a forecast for a case filed today.

The queue

Cases with no decision yet. A different figure from the duration of completed cases: quick cases leave the queue first, so the long ones accumulate among those still waiting.

No undecided cases in this release.

What became of appeals to the BIA

An immigration judge's decision can be appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals. This is what the Board did with those appeals. A high share of reversals and remands tells a different story than a low grant rate alone.

What became of appeals to the BIA
BIA decisionAppeals
Dismiss Appeal/Affirm IJ's Decision2,275
Remand748
Denied643
Dismissed (Voluntary Departure Granted)259
Summary Affirmance222
Termination84
Lacks Jurisdiction - BIA82
Withdrawal of Appeal78
Summarily Dismiss76
Background Check Remand75
Temporary Protected Status67
Other46
Terminate-DHS PD39
Administratively Closed-DHS PD25
Moot Bond19
Sustain16
SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE/VD11
Grant with no Remand11
Summary Dismissal (e) no brief11
Administratively Closed7
ROP Returned to Court to correct deficiency4
Summary Dismissal (G) untimely or waived appeal3
Withdrawal-DHS PD1

Data comes from the monthly EOIR Case Data release (U.S. DOJ FOIA Library). This service is not affiliated with the U.S. government and does not provide legal advice. The data lags by roughly a month; for current case status use ACIS and Respondent Access. The source is known to have missing records, including relief applications — absent data does not mean it is absent from your case.