ADMISSIBILITY - ABANDONMENT OF LPR STATUS - BURDEN
Matadin v. Mukasey, ___ F.3d ___ (2d Cir. Oct. 8, 2008) (petition for review granted, reversing removal order, where agency erroneously assigned burden of proof of abandonment of LPR status to noncitizen, where law required DHS to prove it by clear, unequivocal and convincing evidence).
CITIZENSHIP - DERIVATIVE CITIZENSHIP - MINOR MUST BE LPR
Matter of Nwozuzu, 24 I. & N. Dec. 609 (BIA 2008) (to obtain derivative citizenship under former INA 321(a) (1994), person must have acquired LPR status while he or she was under 18 years old).
ADMISSION - REFUGEES CONSIDERED LPRS AS OF DATE OF ADMISSION
Refugees are considered LPRs retroactively as of the date of admission. 8 C.F.R. 209.1(e).
ANALYSIS - DIVISIBLE STATUTE - CONJUNCTIVE CHARGE
United States v. Snellenberger, 548 F.3d 699 (9th Cir. Oct. 28, 2008) (per curiam) (en banc) (finding, in dictum, that a plea of no-contest to a charge phrased in the conjunctive (using "and") established conviction of all the conjunctive elements).
RELIEF - ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS - 245(i) DEADLINE NOT SUBJECT TO EQUITABLE TOLLING ON ACCOUNT OF INEFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL
Balam-Chuc v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1044. (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2008) (April 30, 2001 filing deadline for adjustment of status under INA 245(i), which allows qualifying relatives of LPRs to apply more quickly for immigrant visas, is a statute of repose and thus not subject to equitable tolling for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel).
JUDICIAL REVIEW - PETITION FOR REVIEW - DUE PROCESS - INEFFECTIVE COUNSEL DOES NOT VIOLATE DUE PROCESS UNLESS IT RENDERS THE REMOVAL HEARING ITSELF FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR
Balam-Chuc v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1044 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2008) (counsels ineffective assistance in preparing and filing visa petition was not a violation of due process where petitioner could not show a deficiency relating to fundamental fairness of removal hearing itself).
JUDICIAL REVIEW - PETITION FOR REVIEW - DUE PROCESS - INEFFECTIVE COUNSEL DOES NOT VIOLATE DUE PROCESS UNLESS IT RENDERS THE REMOVAL HEARING ITSELF FUNDAMENTALLY UNFAIR
Balam-Chuc v. Mukasey, 547 F.3d 1044 (9th Cir. Oct. 24, 2008) (counsels ineffective assistance in preparing and filing visa petition was not a violation of due process where petitioner could not show a deficiency relating to fundamental fairness of removal hearing itself).
IMMIGRATION OFFENSES - VISA FRAUD - ELEMENTS
United States v. Boskic, 545 F.3d 69 (1st Cir. Oct. 22, 2008) ("The elements of a 1546(a) violation are: (1) the defendant made a false statement, (2) the statement was made knowingly and (3) under oath, (4) the statement concerns a "material fact," (5) and the statement was made in an application required by the United States immigration laws and regulations. See 18 U.S.C. 1546(a); United States v. Chu, 5 F.3d 1244, 1247 (9th Cir.1993). Boskic explicitly challenges only the sufficiency of the evidence on the first element-whether he made false statements on his immigration forms.
POST CON RELIEF - GROUNDS - RIGHT TO COUNSEL
United States v. Boskic, 545 F.3d 69 (1st Cir. Oct. 22, 2008) (filing of federal criminal complaint does not trigger the attachment of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, for purposes of assessing admissibility of statements given to investigating officers after that point.)
AGGRAVATED FELONY - CRIME OF VIOLENCE - RAPE
United States v. Gomez-Gomez, 547 F.3d 242. (5th Cir. Oct. 21, 2008) (en banc) (California conviction of rape, under Penal Code 261(a)(2) (1991) [sexual intercourse "accomplished against a person's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person of another."], where duress encompassed "a direct or implied threat of ... hardship, or retribution sufficient to coerce a reasonable person of ordinary susceptibilities." Cal.
