Matter of Kochlani, 24 I. & N. Dec. 128 (BIA 2007) (federal conviction of trafficking in counterfeit goods or services in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2320 (2000) [traffic in goods or services and in doing so knowingly used a spurious trademark that was likely to confuse or deceive others] is a crime involving moral turpitude;
"As Congress made clear when enacting 18 U.S.C. 2320, Trademark counterfeiting . . . defrauds purchasers, who pay for brand-name quality and take home only a fake, but it also exploits mark holders, since counterfeiters [can earn] enormous profits . . .

Matter of Kochlani, 24 I. & N. Dec. 128 (BIA 2007) (California conviction of
grand theft, in violation of Penal Code 487(1), constitutes a crime involving moral turpitude), following United States v. Esparza-Ponce, 193 F.3d 1133, 1136-37 (9th Cir. 1999); Matter of De La Nues, 18 I. & N. Dec. 140, 145 (BIA 1981). http://www.usdoj.gov/eoir/vll/intdec/vol24/3559.pdf

Tostado v. Carlson, 481 F.3d 1012 (8th Cir. April 2, 2007) (Illinois convictions for the unlawful possession of cocaine and unlawful possession of cannabis are not aggravated felonies for immigration purposes), following Lopez v. Gonzales, ___ U.S. ___, 127 S.Ct. 625 (2006).

United States v. Ibekwe, 891 F. Supp. 587 (M.D. Fla. 1995) (defense counsel's failure to advise defendant before plea of adverse Nigerian immigration consequences of plea did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel).

United States v. Ramos-Sanchez, 483 F.3d 400 (5th Cir. Apr. 2, 2007) (Kansas conviction for violation of K.S.A. 21-3510(a)(1), solicitation of a child to perform an illegal sex act is "sexual abuse of a minor" and thus a "crime of violence" for illegal re-entry sentencing purposes, on the basis that the act "is abusive because of the psychological harm it can cause, even if any resulting sex is consensual").

United States v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 712 (5th Cir. 2007) (Texas conviction for delivery of a controlled substance, in violation of V.T.C.A., Health & Safety Code 481.112, was not a drug-trafficking offense for illegal re-entry sentence enhancement purposes, since the definition of "deliver" includes solicitation, and solicitation is not included as a non-substantive offense that can trigger a sentence enhancement under the 2004 version of U.S.S.G. 2L1.2).

United States v. Zeng, __ F.Supp.2d __, 2007 WL 902380 (N.D.Cal. Mar, 22 2007) (granting motion to withdraw guilty plea where Rule 11 violation occurred because defendant was prevented, through cultural mores, from interrupting his attorney during the guilty plea phase, and defendant did not understand the nature of the charges against him, or the immigration consequences thereof, until he was later able to read a Chinese translation of the plea agreement).

Fonseca-Sanchez v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 439 (7th Cir. Apr. 13, 2007) (petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies by not claiming a right to interim "U" visa relief prior to issuance of a final removal order).

United States v. Mungia-Portillo, 484 F.3d 813, 816 (5th Cir. Apr. 17, 2007) ("In deciding whether a prior statute of conviction qualifies as a crime of violence, this court has alternatively employed (1) a "common sense approach," defining the offense according to its "ordinary, contemporary, [and] common meaning," or (2) a "categorical approach," defining the offense according to a "generic, contemporary definition." Compare United States v. Izaguirre-Flores, 405 F.3d 270, 273-74 (5th Cir.2005), with United States v.

United States v. Mungia-Portillo, 484 F.3d 813, 816 (5th Cir. Apr. 17, 2007) (Tennessee conviction for aggravated assault, in violation of Tennessee Code 39-13-102, is a "crime of violence" for illegal re-entry sentencing purposes, applying the "common sense" analysis).