Rodriguez v. Holder, 683 F.3d 1164 (9th Cir. Jun. 27, 2012) (BIA fails to apply the correct legal standard where it states the correct standard, but actually engaged in prohibited de novo review or fact-finding); see (Alvarado de Rodriguez v. Holder), 585 F.3d 227, 235 (5th Cir.2009) (Quite simply, the BIA is not entitled to state the correct legal standard but actually apply an incorrect standard.); Kabba v. Mukasey, 530 F.3d 1239, 1246 (10th Cir.

Rivera-Peraza v. Holder, 684 F.3d 906, *910 (9th Cir. Jun. 29, 2012) (As we make clear today, 1212.7(d) directs the agency to consider hardship to the alien and to his or her relatives.); following Mejia v. Gonzales, 499 F.3d 991, 995 (9th Cir. Aug. 24, 2007) (court of appeal expressly rejected contention that 8 C.F.R. 1212.7(d) altered or superseded the hardship standard of INA 212(h)(1)(B), 8 U.S.C.

United States v. Meredith, __ F.3d __, 2012 WL 2393194 (9th Cir. Jun. 26, 2012) (Unpublished) (restitution order vacated and remanded for recalculation because the district court failed to consider evidence that defendant presented at sentencing); citing United States v. Najjor, 255 F.3d 979, 985 (9th Cir.2001) (requiring the district court to consider all the evidence pertaining to the restitution order and make an independent determination of the [victim's] actual loss).

United States v. Meredith, 685 F.3d 814 (9th Cir. Jun. 26, 2012) ([W]e have held that restitution orders can include losses caused by related conduct for which the defendant was not convicted.); citing United States v. Brock"Davis, 504 F.3d 991, 998"99 (9th Cir. 2007).

The Attorney General, in Matter of Jean, 23 I&N Dec. 373 (A.G. 2002), created a heightened INA 212(h) hardship standard for "violent or dangerous" crimes. This "violent or dangerous" category is different from the definition of aggravated felony "crime of violence" under INA 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(F). They are two distinct terms of art. The violent or dangerous INA 212(h) standard was incorporated into the regulations at 8 CFR 212.7.

State v. Alshaif, 724 S.E.2d 597 (N.C. Ct. App. Feb. 21, 2012) (Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1743 (2010), does not apply retroactively); following United States v. Hong, 671 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir. 2011).

Note: North Carolina follows the retroactivity framework announced in Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989), which provides that new rules of criminal procedure do not apply retroactively unless one of two exceedingly narrow exceptions are met"the decision is substantive rather than procedural or it is a watershed rule of criminal procedure. Alshaif, No. COA11-817, slip op.

The All-in-One Guide to Defeating ICE Hold Requests is available on the National Immigration Project's website: http://www.nationalimmigrationproject.org/community/All_in_One_Guide_to_...

Chaidez v. Holder, 655 F.3d 684, 688, 693 (7th Cir. 2011) (holding that Padilla does not apply retroactively on collateral review), cert. granted 80 U.S.L.W. 3429 (U.S. Apr. 30, 2012) (No. 11"820) (whether March 31, 2010 decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S.Ct. 1473 (2010), applies to defendants whose convictions became final before Padilla was decided).

Matter of Arrabally and Yerrabelly, 25 I&N Dec. 771 (BIA Apr. 17, 2012) (noncitizen who leaves the United States temporarily pursuant to a grant of advance parole does not thereby make a departure . . . from the United States within the meaning of INA 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II)); clarifying Matter of Lemus, 24 I&N Dec. 373 (BIA 2007).

Mitchell v. United States, 526 U.S. 314, 321 (1999) (A witness, in a single proceeding, may not testify voluntarily about a subject and then invoke the privilege against self-incrimination when questioned about the details. See Rogers v. United States, 340 U.S. 367, 373, 71 S.Ct. 438, 95 L.Ed. 344 (1951). The privilege is waived for the matters to which the witness testifies, and the scope of the waiver is determined by the scope of relevant cross-examination); quoting Brown v. United States, 356 U.S. 148, 154-155, 78 S.Ct. 622, 2 L.Ed.2d 589 (1958).