Kohwarian v. Holder, 635 F.3d 174 (5th Cir. Mar. 4, 2011) (respondent knowingly and intentionally waived right to appeal in accepting order of voluntary departure).

United States v. Villanueva-Diaz, ___ F.3d ___, 2011 WL 693001 (5th Cir. Mar. 1, 2011) (defendant's collateral attack on the lawfulness his removal was not barred by any failure to exhaust his administrative remedies, but the negligence of defendant's attorney in failing to inform him of the BIAs dismissal of his appeal did not prejudice him, and therefore did not constitute a due process violation that would render illegal defendant's subsequent illegal reentry conviction).

United States v. Perez-Frias, ___ F.3d ___, 2011 WL 1184390 (2d Cir. Mar. 31, 2011) (42-month sentence for illegal reentry after deportation after an aggravated felony conviction was not unduly harsh in view of the 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors or compared to Guidelines applicable to more serious crimes; the 16-level enhancement applicable to reentrants with certain prior convictions was not improper as not based on review of past sentencing practices and empirical studies, and the sentence was not greater than necessary).

Matter of VO, 25 I. & N. Dec. 426 (BIA Mar. 18, 2011) (California conviction for grand theft is a crime involving moral turpitude for purposes of triggering deportability under INA 237(a)(2)(A)(ii)).

Matter of VO, 25 I. & N. Dec. 426 (BIA Mar. 18, 2011) (where the substantive offense underlying a noncitizen's conviction for an attempt offense is a crime involving moral turpitude, the noncitizen is considered to have been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude for purposes of INA 237(a)(2)(A), even though that section makes no reference to attempt offenses).

Practice Advisory on Matter of Alyazji, 23 I. & N. Dec. 754 (BIA 2005) (Adjustment of Status Following an Admission Does Not Re-Start the Five- Year Clock for Purposes of the Moral Turpitude Deportation Ground), overruling in part Matter of Shanu, 23 I&N Dec. 754 (BIA 2005)
Kathy Brady, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Feb. 28, 2011.
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/immigration/2011/02/practice-advisory-o...

United States v. Baldenegro-Valdez, No. 10-00094-02-CR-W-DGK, slip op. at 2 (W.D. Mo. Mar. 11, 2011) (excluding evidence of a criminal defendants undocumented immigration status, sustaining a defense objection that such evidence was not relevant to guilt or innocence and, even if it was, it was unduly prejudicial).

Noncitizens facing immigration detention and the advocates who represent them face a myriad of legal issues, ranging from eligibility for bond or parole, the location of and transfer between detention facilities, appearances in Immigration Court and eligibility for relief from removal, and harsh detention conditions.

Lupe Salinas, Benny Agosto, Jr., & Eloisa Morales Arteaga, But Your, Honor, Hes an Illegal! Can the Undocumented Workers Alien Status be Introduced at Trial, TEXAS BAR JOURNAL (2011).

In Judulang v. Holder, Supreme Court Case No. 10-694, the Court agreed to hear a case about the continued availability of 212(c) relief. The question presented is: Whether a lawful permanent resident who was convicted by guilty plea of an offense that renders him deportable and excludable under differently phrased statutory subsections, but who did not depart and reenter the United States between his conviction and the commencement of removal proceedings, is categorically foreclosed from seeking discretionary relief from removal under former INA 212(c). See Matter of Blake, 23 I&N Dec.