Haiti
Sufficient sampleTotal decisions
1621
Grants
186
Denials
1435
Immigration judge
Public EOIR asylum decision statistics
Grant rate
15.1%
813 / 5384
Total decisions
5384
Merits decision sample in current public statistics
Grant rate
15.1%
Grants: 813
Denial rate
84.9%
Denials: 4571
Other relief rate
0.0%
Other relief: 0
This profile is summarized from public sources for background context only. It is not an ImmJudge evaluation.
Judge Dowell was appointed as an Immigration Judge in December 1990. He received a Bachelor of Science degree from James Madison University in 1977, and a Juris Doctorate from George Mason University School of Law in 1980. Judge Dowell joined the Executive Office for Immigration Review in 1981, and served as an attorney-advisor with the Board of Immigration Appeals in Falls Church, Virginia, until his appointment in 1990. Judge Dowell is a member of the Pennsylvania Bar.
This summary is based on public material and may not reflect the latest assignment information.
Source: TRAC Judge Report · View original report
Community perspective
Read public experiences and process discussions related to J. Daniel Dowell.
You can start with these public topics
This table shows anonymized case details. It does not include applicant names, case numbers, A Numbers, or EOIR internal case IDs. Results are informational only, not legal advice, and cannot predict any individual case outcome.
Showing 0 of 0
Review this judge's historical asylum outcomes for applicants from different nationalities.
| Nationality | Total decisions | Grants | Denials | Grant rate | Denial rate | Distribution | Action |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Haiti Sufficient sample | 1621 | 186 | 1435 | 11.5% | 88.5% | View details | |
Niue Sufficient sample | 926 | 83 | 843 | 9.0% | 91.0% | View details | |
Guatemala Sufficient sample | 684 | 40 | 644 | 5.8% | 94.2% | View details | |
Colombia Sufficient sample | 652 | 118 | 534 | 18.1% | 81.9% | View details | |
Honduras Sufficient sample | 374 | 39 | 335 | 10.4% | 89.6% | View details | |
Spain Sufficient sample | 194 | 14 | 180 | 7.2% | 92.8% | View details | |
Cuba Sufficient sample | 166 | 57 | 109 | 34.3% | 65.7% | View details | |
Venezuela Sufficient sample | 162 | 51 | 111 | 31.5% | 68.5% | View details | |
Peru Sufficient sample | 136 | 41 | 95 | 30.1% | 69.9% | View details | |
Switzerland Sufficient sample | 44 | 19 | 25 | 43.2% | 56.8% | View details | |
Russia Sufficient sample | 42 | 27 | 15 | 64.3% | 35.7% | View details | |
Mexico Sufficient sample | 37 | 1 | 36 | 2.7% | 97.3% | View details | |
Albania Moderate sample | 23 | 14 | 9 | 60.9% | 39.1% | View details | |
Guyana Moderate sample | 21 | 1 | 20 | 4.8% | 95.2% | View details | |
Brazil Moderate sample | 18 | 2 | 16 | 11.1% | 88.9% | View details | |
Former Countries Moderate sample | 18 | 15 | 3 | 83.3% | 16.7% | View details | |
India Moderate sample | 13 | 1 | 12 | 7.7% | 92.3% | View details | |
Romania Moderate sample | 13 | 6 | 7 | 46.2% | 53.8% | View details | |
Bulgaria Moderate sample | 12 | 4 | 8 | 33.3% | 66.7% | View details | |
Myanmar (Burma) Small sample | 9 | 3 | 6 | 33.3% | 66.7% | View details |
Total decisions
1621
Grants
186
Denials
1435
Total decisions
926
Grants
83
Denials
843
Total decisions
684
Grants
40
Denials
644
Total decisions
652
Grants
118
Denials
534
Total decisions
374
Grants
39
Denials
335
Total decisions
194
Grants
14
Denials
180
Total decisions
166
Grants
57
Denials
109
Total decisions
162
Grants
51
Denials
111
Total decisions
136
Grants
41
Denials
95
Total decisions
44
Grants
19
Denials
25
Total decisions
42
Grants
27
Denials
15
Total decisions
37
Grants
1
Denials
36
Total decisions
23
Grants
14
Denials
9
Total decisions
21
Grants
1
Denials
20
Total decisions
18
Grants
2
Denials
16
Total decisions
18
Grants
15
Denials
3
Total decisions
13
Grants
1
Denials
12
Total decisions
13
Grants
6
Denials
7
Total decisions
12
Grants
4
Denials
8
Total decisions
9
Grants
3
Denials
6
These statistics come from public EOIR data. They reflect historical statistics only, are not legal advice, and cannot predict any individual case outcome.
Status: active
Status: active
Status: active
Status: active
Status: active
Status: active
This website is for general information only and is not legal advice.