RELIEF - CONTINUOUS PRESENCE REQUIREMENT - STOP-TIME RULE - EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL CLAIM REJECTED

Arca-Pineda v. Att'y Gen., 527 F.3d 101 (3d Cir. May 28, 2008) (respondent cannot re-start clock by failing to appear for removal proceeding and then waiting an additional 10 years).

jurisdiction: 
Third Circuit

RELIEF - SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION - STOP-TIME RULE

Arca-Pineda v. Att'y Gen., 527 F.3d 101 (3d Cir. May 28, 2008) (continuous physical presence clock did not begin to run again after an administrative closure; administrative closure is not a termination proceedings; it only removes the case from the IJs calendar).

jurisdiction: 
Third Circuit

RELIEF - CANCELLATION - STOP-TIME RULE

Arca-Pineda v. Att'y Gen., 527 F.3d 101 (3d Cir. May 28, 2008) (continuous physical presence clock did not begin to run again after an administrative closure; administrative closure is not a termination proceedings; it only removes the case from the IJs calendar).

jurisdiction: 
Third Circuit

REMOVAL PROCEEDINGS - ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSURE

Arca-Pineda v. Att'y Gen., 527 F.3d 101 (3d Cir. May 28, 2008) (continuous physical presence clock did not begin to run again after an administrative closure; administrative closure is not a termination proceedings; it only removes the case from the IJs calendar).

jurisdiction: 
Third Circuit

POST-CON - VIENNA CONVENTION

Gomez v. Quarterman, 529 F.3d 322 (5th Cir. May 27, 2008) (failure to advise Mexican defendant of rights under Vienna Convention did not require suppression of murder confession).

jurisdiction: 
Fifth Circuit

POST-CON - GROUNDS - AFFIRMATIVE MISADVICE

Rubio v. State, 194 P.3d 1224 (Nev. Oct. 30, 2008) (affirmative misrepresentation of immigration consequences by counsel may provide grounds for attacking the voluntariness of the plea).

jurisdiction: 
Ninth Circuit

RECORD OF CONVICTION - CLERK'S MINUTE ORDER MAY BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING WHICH COUNT WAS THE COUNT OF CONVICTION

United States v. Snellenberger, 548 F.3d 699 (9th Cir. Oct. 28, 2008) (per curiam) (en banc) (to determine the nature of a conviction, when applying the modified categorical approach of Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990), the reviewing court may consider a clerk's minute order that conforms to certain essential procedures as establishing a plea to Count I, as opposed to Count II), overruling United States v. Diaz-Argueta, 447 F.3d 1167, 1169 (9th Cir. 2006).

jurisdiction: 
Ninth Circuit

POST CON RELIEF - PARDON - NEW YORK

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 23, 2008
GOVERNOR PATERSON ANNOUNCES PARDON OF RICKY "SLICK RICK" WALTERS
On May 23, 2008, Governor David A. Paterson granted Ricky Walters a full and unconditional pardon of his 1991 attempted murder and weapon convictions, in order to allow Walters to seek relief from deportation from the federal immigration courts. "Mr.

jurisdiction: 
Other

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - RULE OF LENITY - LIMITATION TO AMBIGUOUS STATUTES

Burgess v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, ___ (Apr. 16, 2008) ("Burgess urges us to apply the rule of lenity in determining whether the term "felony drug offense" incorporates [21 U.S.C.] 802(13)'s definition of "felony." "[T]he touchstone of the rule of lenity is statutory ambiguity." Bifulco v. United States, 447 U.S. 381, 387, 100 S.Ct. 2247, 65 L.Ed.2d 205 (1980) (internal quotation marks omitted). "The rule comes into operation at the end of the process of construing what Congress has expressed," Callanan v. United States, 364 U.S. 587, 596, 81 S.Ct.

jurisdiction: 
US Supreme Ct

STATUTORY INTERPRETATION - GIVING MEANING TO EVERY WORD

Begay v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, ___, 2008 WL 1733270 (Apr. 16, 2008) ("These considerations taken together convince us that, " to give effect ... to every clause and word " of this statute, we should read the examples as limiting the crimes that clause (ii) covers to crimes that are roughly similar, in kind as well as in degree of risk posed, to the examples themselves. Duncan v. Walker, 533 U.S. 167, 174, 121 S.Ct. 2120, 150 L.Ed.2d 251 (2001) (quoting United States v. Menasche, 348 U.S. 528, 538-539, 75 S.Ct. 513, 99 L.Ed.

jurisdiction: 
US Supreme Ct

 

TRANSLATE