United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 541 F.3d 881 (9th Cir. Aug. 29, 2008) (immigration judge was not required to give advice of availability of pre-hearing voluntary departure, under pre-IIRAIRA law, because the relief would have been granted prior to the respondents appearance before the IJ).
Note: The court gave no opinion on the possible outcome of this issue had post-IIRAIRA rules applied, which allow the IJ to grant "pre-hearing" voluntary departure at the master calendar hearing. INA 240B(a)(1).

United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 541 F.3d 881 (9th Cir. Aug. 29, 2008) (California conviction of robbery, in violation of Penal Code 211, constituted crime of violence under USSG 2L1.2(b), because the elements of the offense meet the generic definition of "extortion," one of the enumerated crimes of violence; California Penal Code 211 is does not categorically meet the generic definition of "robbery."), distinguishing United States v. McDougherty, 920 F.2d 569, 574 (9th Cir.

United States v. Becerril-Lopez, 528 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. Jun. 12, 2008) (generic definition of extortion: "obtaining something of value from another with is consent induced by the wrongful use of force, fear, or threats."; extortion includes threats to property and non-immediate danger), citing Scheidler v. Natl Org. for Women, Inc., 537 U.S. 393, 409 (2003).

A new AILF Practice Advisory entitled "The Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine: FOIA and Petitions for Review" is now available. This practice advisory examines how DHS invokes the fugitive disentitlement doctrine to deny FOIA requests and how courts apply the doctrine to dismiss petitions for review. The advisory provides arguments to challenge the doctrine in both contexts. Access this resource on the AILF website at http://www.ailf.org/lac/pa/lac_pa_fugdis.pdf.

A second conviction of possession of a federally listed controlled substance, preceded by a prior conviction of solicitation to commit a controlled substances offense, can potentially constitute an aggravated felony drug trafficking offense. This is because the solicitation prior can constitute a prior, in federal court, to elevate the second possession conviction to an aggravated felony. A solicitation conviction is not interpreted under the criminal recidivist provisions as it is under the federal immigration laws, because different language is used.

A second conviction of possession of a federally listed controlled substance, preceded by a prior conviction of solicitation to commit a controlled substances offense, can potentially constitute an aggravated felony drug trafficking offense. This is because the solicitation prior can constitute a prior, in federal court, to elevate the second possession conviction to an aggravated felony. A solicitation conviction is not interpreted under the criminal recidivist provisions as it is under the federal immigration laws, because different language is used.

An ICE attorney recently did a detailed comparison of the controlled substances forbidden under California Health & Safety Code 11350, with those forbidden under federal law, and claimed there was only one drug on the state list that was not on the federal list: apomorphine. Thanks to Michael Mehr. One extra drug, however, is enough to enable the Paulus defense to work.

"By law, as a legal permanent resident, I am entitled to proof of my status. I have paid for and am entitled to a replacement card proving this status. Specifically, the regulations at 8 C.F.R. Section 264.5 set forth the requirements for an application for a replacement Permanent Resident Card. Notably, these regulations do not require a police clearance, proof of court dispositions, or other legal documents. As a legal permanent resident, I am entitled to proof of such status.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/ICE_FOIA.pdf

Ram v. Mukasey, 529 F.3d 1238 (9th Cir. Jun. 26, 2008) (finding waiver of counsel was not knowing or voluntary, given noncitizens obvious difficulties during proceedings despite strong arguments available to him).