JUDICIAL REVIEW - EXHAUSTION OF ISSUE BEFORE IJ AND BIA
Notash v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 693 (9th Cir. Nov. 2, 2005) (court of appeals generally lacks jurisdiction over claims that the petitioner fails to present to the IJ or BIA); Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (discussing the requirement of administrative exhaustion found in 8 U.S.C. 1252(d).
JUDICIAL REVIEW - DISCRETIONARY DECISIONS
Schroeck v. Gonzales, 429 F.3d 947 (10th Cir. Nov.
JUDICIAL REVIEW - COURT OF APPEALS REQUIREMENT THAT ISSUE BE EXHAUSTED BEFORE BIA
Piyeda v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___ (10th Cir. Oct. 27, 2005) (challenge to BIA adverse ruling on appeal from removal order dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies before BIA).
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/039501.html
JUDICIAL REVIEW - SUMMARY BIA AFFIRMANCES
Lopez v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___ (7th Cir. Oct. 26, 2005) (where the BIA summarily affirms IJ decision based on both statutory and discretionary grounds, remand to BIA is appropriate to determine whether affirmation was based upon statutory interpretation or discretion, in order to determine whether court has jurisdiction to review), following Lanza v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 917, 919-20, 932 (9th Cir. 2004); Zhu v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d 521, 527 (5th Cir. 2004) ; Haoud v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 201, 206-08 (1st Cir. 2003). But see, Ekasinta v. Gonzales, 415 F.3d 1188, 1193-94 (10th Cir.
JUDICIAL REVIEW - REAL ID ACT - SCOPE OF COURT OF APPEALS PETITION FOR REVIEW JURISDICTION
The legislative history of the REAL ID Act states: "[t]he purpose of section 106(a)(1)(A)(iii) is to permit judicial review over those issues that were historically reviewable on habeas constitutional and statutory-construction questions, not discretionary or factual questions." 151 Cong. Rec. H2813, at H2873 (May 3, 2005). The court retains jurisdiction to review the Boards erroneous application of the INA to undisputed facts. Singh v. Ashcroft, 351 F.3d 435, 441-442 (9th Cir. 2003). See also Ogbudimkpa v. Ashcroft, 342 F.3d 207, 223 (3d Cir.
JUDICIAL REVIEW - PETITIONS FOR REVIEW
John R.B. Palmer, Stephen W. Yale-Loehr, and Elizabeth Cronin, "Why Are So Many People Challenging Board of Immigration Appeals Decisions in Federal Court? An Empirical Analysis of the Recent Surge in Petitions for Review" (August 4, 2005). Cornell Law School. Cornell Law School Working Papers Series. Paper 18.
http://lsr.nellco.org/cornell/clsops/papers/18
JUDICIAL REVIEW - REAL ID ACT
Practice Advisory: Federal Court Jurisdiction Over Discretionary Decisions After REAL ID: Mandamus, Other Affirmative Suits and Petitions for Review (September 7, 2005).
http://www.ailf.org/lac/lac_pa_090705.pdf
JUDICIAL REVIEW - REAL ID ACT
Grass v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (8th Cir. Aug. 12, 2005) (no jurisdiction exists under 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(D) to review Immigration Judge's purely discretionary decision to deny continuance of a removal hearing, unless that ruling results in such procedural unfairness as to implicate due process).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/8th/041115p.pdf
JUDICIAL REVIEW - REAL ID ACT
Advisory for pro se litigants filing petitions for review (post REAL ID
Act) is available at:
http://nysda.org/NYSDA_Resources/Immigrant_Defense_Project/05_ProSeAdvis...
ILLEGAL REENTRY - SENTENCE - BOOKER DENIAL
United States v. Figuereo, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. April 19, 2005) (sentence for being found in the United States after having been deported affirmed where defendant failed to demonstrate reasonable probability that district court would impose lower sentence on remand).
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/032723.html
