FIREARMS - NONIMMIGRANT WITH A FIREARM
United States v. Elrawy, __ F.3d __, 2006 WL 1085165 (5th Cir. Apr. 26, 2006) (18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5)(B), punishing possession of a firearm by a nonimmigrant visa entrant, does not apply to a nonimmigrant visa entrant who is out of status).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/5th/0420123cr0p.pdf
FIREARMS - UNDOCUMENTED NONCITIZEN WITH A FIREARM
United States v. Elrawy, __ F.3d __, 2006 WL 1085165 (5th Cir. Apr. 26, 2006) (18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5)(A), prohibiting possession of a firearm by a noncitizen who entered the United States illegally or is out of status applies to a noncitizen who is out of status, but has had an I-130 visa petition filed on his behalf).
AGGRAVATED FELONY - FRAUD OFFENSE - FOOD STAMP FRAUD
"Food Stamp Fraud," despite what its name sounds like, may be neither an Aggravated Felony nor a Crime of Moral Turpitude. In some jurisdictions, the elements of the offense do not include any of the key elements that define common law fraud; instead, the offense is basically a strict-liability regulatory offense.
AGGRAVATED FELONY - CRIME OF VIOLENCE - SEXUAL CONTACT WITH CHILD UNDER 16
Dos Santos v. Gonzalez, __ F.3d __, 2006 WL 521583 (2d Cir. Mar. 3, 2006) (Connecticut conviction of violating Connecticut General Statute, 53-21(a)(2) [punishing "contact with the intimate parts, as defined by section 53a-65, of a child under the age of sixteen years or subjects a child under sixteen years of age to contact with the intimate parts of such person, in a sexual and indecent manner likely to impair the health or morals of such child."], is an aggravated felony crime of violence for immigration purposes as defined by 18 U.S.C. 16(b)).
ADMISSION - NONCITIZEN IS INSPECTED AND ADMITTED EVEN IF THE ADMISSION IS BASED ON FRAUDULENT DOCUMENTS
Matter of KBN, 9 I. & N. Dec. 50 (BIA 1960) (decided shortly after Congress amended ina 245(a) to require "inspection and admission," rather than "admission as a bona fide nonimmigrant," the BIA held that entry by means of a fraudulently-acquired "certificate of identity" (comparable to a B-1 visa in the circumstances of the case) meets the "inspected and admitted" requirement - and then affirmed the decision to deny adjustment of status in the exercise of discretion).
ADMISSIBILITY - ARRIVING ALIEN - BURDEN OF PROOF - BURDEN ON GOVERNMENT WHERE APPLICANT HAS COLORABLE CLAIM TO LPR STATUS
Matter of Huang, 19 I. & N. Dec. 749, 754 (BIA 1988) ("While the burden of proving admissibility is generally on the applicant in exclusion proceedings, see section 291 of the Act, 8 U.S.C. 1361 (1982), where an applicant for admission has a colorable claim to returning resident status, the burden is on the Service to show that the applicant should be deprived of his or her status as a lawful permanent resident. Matter of Salazar, 17 I & N Dec. 167 (BIA 1979); Matter of Kane, [15 I & N Dec 258 (BIA 1975)]").
ARRIVING ALIEN - NOT DEPORTABLE = UNSTATED EXCEPTION TO "SEEKING ADMISSION STATUTE"
Where LPR who is not deportable briefly leaves the United States, it would arguably violate Substantive Due Process and Equal Protection to consider him or her an arriving alien, and thus inadmissible, and the court must seek a construction of INA 101(a)(13)(C)(v) which avoids these constitutional problems. Note that INA 101(a)(13)(C)(v) contains no exceptions for people granted waivers under INA 212(c), 212(i), or former suspension of deportation under 244.
CONVICTION - MILITARY - SUMMARY COURT MARTIAL PROBABLY NOT A CONVICTION
Belliss, Consequences Of A Court-Martial Conviction For United States Service Members Who Are Not United States Citizens, 51 NAVAL L. REV. 53, 57 n.23 (2005) ("Whether the finding of guilty and imposition of punishment by a summary court-martial officer against an accused amounts to a conviction for immigration purposes is likely answered in the negative. See Middendorf v. Henry, 425 U.S. 25, 40-42 (1976).
MILITARY - DUTY TO ADVISE ABOUT IMMIGRATION CONSEQUENCES OF PLEA
United States v. Berumen, __ M.J. __ (C.M.A.
CONVICTION - PLEA - NOLO CONTENDERE - NO CONTEST PLEA EQUIVALENT TO GUILTY PLEA RESULTING IN CONVICTION FOR IMMIGRATION PURPOSES
Canada v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2006 WL 1367367 (2d Cir. May 18, 2006) (Connecticut nolo contendere plea results in conviction under INA 101(a)(48)(A), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(48)(A) for removal purposes).
