JUDICIAL REVIEW - DEFERENCE - MORAL TURPITUDE DETERMINATIONS
Marmolejo-Campos v. Holder, 558 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. Mar. 4, 2009) (en banc) (Chevron deference applies to the ultimate determination of whether an offense, once established, meets the CMT definition; deference is due to the BIAs assessment of "the character, gravity and moral significance of the conduct" as the BIA "draw[s] upon all its expertise as the single body charged with adjudicating all federal immigration cases."), overruling Plasencia-Ayala v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 738, 744-745 (9th Cir. 2008); Nicanor-Romero v. Mukasey, 523 F.3d 922, 997 (9th Cir.
JUDICIAL REVIEW - DEFERENCE - UNPUBLISHED DECISIONS
Marmolejo-Campos v. Holder, 558 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. Mar. 4, 2009) (en banc) (unpublished BIA decisions are generally given Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (1944) deference BIA, which depends upon the persuasive value of the decision, unless the decision relies upon a published decision, in which case full Chevron deference is accorded).
NATURE OF CONVICTION - RECORD OF CONVICTION
United States v. Strickland, 556 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. Mar. 2, 2009) (post-conviction sex-offender registration documents, signed by defendant in presence of witnesses, constituted sufficient admission of facts to qualify as "judicially noticeable facts" that may be used in a modified categorical analysis to determine whether a Maryland child abuse conviction was under the portion of the statute that involved sexual abuse of a minor for purposes of enhancing the sentence for conviction of receipt of child pornography).
ADMISSION - K-VISA IS A NONIMMIGRANT VISA
Atunnise v. Mukasey, 523 F.3d 830 (7th Cir. Apr. 30, 2008) (a K-visa [fiancee visa] is a nonimmigrant visa; nonimmigrant is ineligible for a waiver under INA 212(i), which applies only to intending immigrants; rejecting argument that K-visa is really an immigrant visa since all K-visa recipients intend to immigrate to the U.S.).
RELIEF - CANCELLATION OF REMOVAL - RETROACTIVITY
Obi v. Holder, 558 F.3d 609 (7th Cir. Mar. 03, 2009) (per curiam) (use of pre-IIRAIRA conviction to create bar to cancellation of removal under the stop-time rule is not impermissibly retroactive).
CRIME OF MORAL TURPITUDE - FALSE STATEMENT - TO FEDERAL OFFICER
Ghani v. Holder, 557 F.3d 836 (7th Cir. Mar. 9, 2009) (federal conviction for making a false statement to an officer, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1001, is categorically a crime involving moral turpitude; "Even if the conduct for which Mr. Ghani was convicted did not rise to the level of fraud, however, his conviction necessarily establishes that he knowingly and willfully lied to the Government of the United States about a material matter.") NOTE: In the Seventh Circuit, Ali v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 737 (7th Cir. 2008) applied Matter of Babaisakov, 24 I. & N. Dec.
IMMIGRATION OFFENSES - VISA FRAUD - ELEMENTS
United States v. Elzahabi, 557 F.3d 879 (8th Cir. Mar. 5, 2009) (federal conviction of knowingly possessing and using a fraudulently obtained immigration document in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1546(a), affirmed because evidence was sufficient to support conviction, rejecting claim that prosecution failed to prove that marriage was invalid), following Lutwak v. United States, 344 U.S. 604, 611-612 (Feb. 9, 1953) ("We do not believe that the validity of the marriages is material. No one is being prosecuted for an offense against the marital relation....
REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS - EVIDENCE - RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT NOT VIOLATED BECAUSE DEFENDANT NOT IN CUSTODY DURING INTERVIEW
United States v. Elzahabi, 557 F.3d 879 (8th Cir. Mar. 5, 2009) (conviction for immigration fraud upheld where defendant was not in custody during interview, so no Miranda warning was required, because agents repeatedly advised him he was free to leave, never physically restrained him, and never placed him in handcuffs).
REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS - EVIDENCE - DUE PROCESS VIOLATION WHERE INVESTIGATIVE REPORT CONTAINED NO DETAILS BY WHICH TO ASSESS ITS RELIABILITY AND MULTIPLE LEVELS OF HEARSAY
Banat v. Holder, 557 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. Mar. 6, 2009) (due process rights were violated when the Immigration Judge based his adverse credibility determination on a investigation report from the State Department that provided no details that would allow the IJ to assess the investigation's reliability or trustworthiness and contained multiple levels of hearsay).
REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS - EVIDENCE
Banat v. Holder , 557 F.3d 886 (8th Cir. Mar. 6, 2009) (IJ did not err in admitting a Form I-213 into evidence, because the BIA did not violate its own regulations in obtaining the form).
