INS v. Lopez-Mendoza, 468 U.S. 1032 (1984); Puc-Ruiz v. Holder, 629 F.3d 771, 775-80 (8th Cir. 2010); see Irene Scharf, The Exclusionary Rule in Immigration Proceedings, 12 SAN DIEGO INTL L. J. 53 (2010).

INA 292; Matt Adams, Advancing the Right to Counsel in Removal Proceedings, 9 Seattle Journal for Social Justice 169 (2010); Donald Kerwin, Charitable Legal Programs for Immigrants: What They Do, Why They Matter and How They Can be Expanded, 04-06 Immigration Briefings 1 (June 2004); Donald Kerwin, Migration Policy Institute, Revisiting the Need for Appointed Counsel 1-9 (April 2005).

Rosemary Cakmis, Construing Crimes of Violence After Johnson v. United States, 15 Benders Immigration Bulletin 795 (June 1, 2010); Rebecca Sharpless, Toward a True Elements Test, 62 University of Miami Law Review 979 (2008).

Mary Holper, Deportation for a Sin: Why Moral Turpitude is Void for Vagueness (Roger Williams University Legal Studies Paper No. 115, SSRN, October 1, 2011).

David Manuel Hernndez, Undue Process, in Constructing Borders/Crossing Boundaries 59-86 (Caroline B. Brettell ed. 2007).

Gerald Neuman, The Lost Century of American Immigration Law (1776-1876), 93 Colum. L. Rev. 1833, 1833-84 (1993); Pratheepan Gulasekaram and Rose Cuison Villazor, Sanctuary Policies & Immigration Federalism, 55 Wayne Law Review 1683 (2009).

Dora Schriro, Dept. of Homeland Security, Immigration Detention Overview and Recommendations 1-29 (Oct. 2009); Detention Watch Network and Stanford Law Schools Immigrants Rights Clinic, Policy Brief: Community-Based Alternatives to Immigration Detention (Aug. 2010); Michael Welch, Detained (2002): Warehousing Illegal Immigrants (pp. 103-127).

The vast majority of criminal charges are disposed of through a plea, see BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, U.S. DEPT OF JUSTICE, SOURCEBOOK OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE STATISTICS 2003, at 450 tbl.5.46 (2005) (only approximately five percent of all state felony criminal prosecutions go to trial).

As the Supreme Court acknowledged with unusual candor in Alabama v. Shelton, a conviction simply is not reliable unless the defendant had access to the guiding hand of counsel and the states case (if not pleaded out) withstood the crucible of meaningful adversarial testing. Alabama v. Shelton, 68 535 U.S. 654, 665 (2002) (quoting Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, 40 (1972)).

Immigration counsel can argue that INA 240A(b)(1)(C), barring 10-year non-LPR cancellation for anyone convicted of an offense under section 212(a)(2), 237(a)(2), or 237(a)(3), does not reach a person who was found by a court to have engaged in conduct that violated a qualifying portion of a protection order under INA 237(a)(2)(E)(ii), if the person was not convicted of an offense under the specified statutes. This removal ground does not require or mention a criminal conviction.