- Noncitizen with no criminal history and no deportations/removals generally gets a time served sentence.
- Those with criminal history, but no deport/removal face more time -
typically 5-30 days depending upon the prior.
- Those with a prior deport/removal are charged with 1325 (petty) and 1326
(felony). If they take the 1325 plea agreement with its stipulated
sentence, the 1326 is dismissed. The parties agree to waive the PSR. One
removal/deport typically gets 30 days. A second removal/deport 60 days
etc.

AILF Article on Brand X in Immigration Cases: Http://www.ailf.org/lac/clearinghouse_brandx.shtml

Penal Code 1203.1 authorizes the sentencing court to impose a fine or county jail incarceration as a condition of probation. This fine or jail is not considered to be imposed on account of the conviction, however, but instead as a condition of probation. (See League of Women Voters of California v.

United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 528 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. Jun.12, 2008) (California conviction of robbery, in violation of Penal Code 211, constituted crime of violence, for purposes of 16-level enhancement of illegal reentry sentence under USSG 2L1.2(b), which contains no reference to 18 U.S.C. 16(b)), distinguishing United States v. McDougherty, 920 F.2d 569, 574 (9th Cir. 1990) (holding California robbery, under Penal Code 211, constituted a crime of violence under USSG 4B1.2 commentary language as well as 18 U.S.C.

United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 528 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. Jun.12, 2008) (Guidelines definitions of crime of violence differ from immigration definition and from each other); United States v. Beltran-Mungia, 489 F.3d 1042, 1049 (9th Cir.

United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 528 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. Jun. 12, 2008) (to show conviction does not fall within ground of removal, noncitizen must show reasonable probability that the state would apply its statute to conduct outside the generic definition, which in the Ninth Circuit can be done by showing that the text of the state statute expressly includes a broader range of conduct than the Guideline: "In Duenas-Alvarez, the defendant's argument relied not on the express text of the statute at issue, but on how state courts might conceivably apply it.

United States v. Juvenile Male, 528 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. Jun. 12, 2008) (district court decision finding juvenile delinquency for alien smuggling revered in part where the juvenile was not provided with Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act protections under 18 U.S.C. 5033; no exception exists where the juvenile lied about his age at the time of arrest).

United States v. Juvenile Male, 528 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. Jun. 12, 2008) (district court decision finding juvenile delinquency for alien smuggling revered in part where the juvenile was not provided with Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act protections under 18 U.S.C. 5033; no exception exists where the juvenile lied about his age at the time of arrest).

United States v. Juvenile Male, 528 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. Jun. 12, 2008) (district court decision finding juvenile delinquency for alien smuggling revered in part where the juvenile was not provided with Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act protections under 18 U.S.C. 5033; no exception exists where the juvenile lied about his age at the time of arrest).

People v. Coulter, 163 Cal.App.4th 1117 (Jun. 10, 2008) (possible, in some cases, for trial court, with express or implied consent of the defendant, to put the issue of factual basis for a guilty plea over to the sentencing hearing).