AGGRAVATED FELONY - THEFT OFFENSE - AUTO THEFT - AIDING AND ABETTING
Gonzales v. Duenas-Alvarez, ___ U.S. ___, 2007 WL 98723 (Jan. 17, 2007) (California conviction of unlawful taking of a vehicle, in violation of Vehicle Code 10851(a), constituted theft offense aggravated felony, under INA 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G), since the crime of "aiding and abetting" a theft offense is included within the substantive offense).

Fifth Circuit

FRAUD OFFENSES - AIDING AND ABETTING
James v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2006 WL 2536614 (5th Cir. Sept. 5, 2006) (federal conviction of aiding and abetting bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1344, constituted an offense "involving" fraud or deceit, since the elements of aiding and abetting bank fraud "necessarily entailed the criminal intent to see bank fraud committed, some affirmative conduct designed to aid the bank fraud, and his seeking, by his own action, to make the bank fraud successful."; "Significantly, 'the aiding and abetting statute, 18 U.S.C. § 2, does not define a separate crime,' but rather provides another means of convicting someone of the underlying offense." (Footnote omitted.)).

Eighth Circuit

AIDING POSSESSION FOR SALE - DRUG TRAFFICKING
United States v. Baca-Valenzuela, 118 F.3d 1223 (8th Cir. July 7, 1997) (federal conviction of aiding and abetting possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, constituted aggravated felony, under INA 101(a)(43)(B), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(B), for purposes of enhancing illegal re-entry sentence under U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(2), despite the fact the conviction was for aiding and abetting).

Ninth Circuit

AGGRAVATED FELONY - FRAUD OFFENSE - ASSISTING IN PREPARATION OF FALSE TAX RETURN
Kawashima v. Holder, 593 F.3d 979 (9th Cir. Jan. 27, 2010) (federal conviction for aiding and assisting in the preparation of a false tax return, in violation of 26 U.S.C. 7206(2), constituted an aggravated felony fraud offense under INA 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(M)(i), rejecting argument that tax offenses other than those described in 26 U.S.C. 7201 cannot qualify as aggravated felonies under subsection (M)(i) because subsection (M)(ii)'s specific reference to 7201 indicates Congress's intent to exclude all federal tax offenses from the definition of aggravated felonies under the more general subsection (M)(i)), withdrawing and superceding 530 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. July 1, 2008); accord, Arguelles-Olivares v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 171 (5th Cir. April 22, 2008); but see Ki Se Lee v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 218 (3d Cir.2004) (the presence of subsection (M)(ii) reflected Congress's intent to specify tax evasion as the only removable tax offense, and thereby exclude tax offenses from the scope of subsection (M)(i)).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - CRIME OF VIOLENCE - AIDING AND ABETTING ASSAULT WITH A DEADLY WEAPON
Ortiz-Magana v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 653 (9th Cir. Sept. 09, 2008) (California conviction of aiding and abetting assault with a deadly weapon, under Penal Code 245(a)(1), constitutes a crime of violence aggravated felony for removal purposes).

AGGRAVATED FELONY - AIDING AND ABETTING
Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940 (9th Cir. Dec. 27, 2007) (California conviction of unauthorized driving of a vehicle, in violation of Vehicle Code 10851(a), constitutes an aggravated felony theft offense, under INA 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G); rejecting an argument that the statute does not define a categorical theft offense because it prohibits aiding and abetting as well as direct commission of the act, and rejecting respondent's argument that applying the modified categorical approach, there is no evidence in the record of conviction showing he committed a theft offense), following Gonzales v. Duenas-Alvarez, 127 S.Ct. 815, 818, 823 (2007) (holding the generic term "theft offense" in INA 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G), includes the crime of aiding and abetting, and vacating a Ninth Circuit decision holding that 10851(a) was not a categorical theft offense).

TAKING OF VEHICLE - THEFT OFFENSE
United States v. Vidal, 426 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2005) (California conviction of unlawful taking of a vehicle, in violation of Vehicle Code § 10851, constitutes an aggravated felony under the, for purposes of an eight-level increase in the base offense level for an illegal re-entry sentence).

THEFT OFFENSE
Fernandez-Ruiz v. Gonzales, 431 F.3d 1212 (9th Cir. June 1, 2005) (Arizona conviction of theft, in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1802(A)(1) and (C), defined as knowingly, and without lawful authority, controlling the property of another with the intent to deprive that person of it, with a sentence of 14 months in custody, constitutes a theft offense aggravated felony under INA § 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G)).

ALIEN SMUGGLING - AIDING AND ABETTING
United States v. Garcia, 400 F.3d 816 (9th Cir. Mar. 11, 2005) (federal conviction of aiding and abetting is not a separate offense from the substantive offenses of alien smuggling and transportation of aliens, but rather a different theory of liability for the same offense).

THEFT OF MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION - THEFT OFFENSE
Penuliar v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. Jan. 12, 2005) (California conviction of unlawful driving or taking a vehicle, in violation of Vehicle Code § 10851(a), was not a theft offense, within the meaning of INA § 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(G), because the statute and charge both were overbroad with respect to the definition of a theft offense by encompassing not only substantive theft offenses but aiding and abetting them as well).

THEFT OFFENSE
Martinez-Perez v. Ashcroft, 393 F.3d 1018 (9th Cir. Dec. 29, 2004) (California conviction for grand theft by taking property from the person of another, in violation of Penal Code § 487(c), constitutes a theft offense, and therefore is an aggravated felony under INA § 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G), for deportation purposes, because California courts have held an intent permanently to deprive the owner of property is an essential element of this offense, and because the record of conviction - i.e., the charge and the absence of any codefendants - negated the possibility the defendant was convicted on an aiding and abetting theory which renders the statute divisible), opinion withdrawn and superseded by 417 F.3d 1022 (9th Cir. Aug. 2, 2005).