CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES " COUNTERFEIT DRUG OFFENSES IN LIEU OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES

Practice Advisory, Su Yon Yi and Katherine Brady, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Burn Statutes and Counterfeit Drug Offenses (2015), see ILRC.org (discussing Matter of Sanchez-Cornejo, 25 I&N Dec. 273 (BIA 2010) (the offense of delivery of a simulated controlled substance in violation of Texas law is not an aggravated felony, as defined by INA 101(a)(43)(B), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(B) (2006), but it is a violation of a law relating to a controlled substance under former INA 241(a)(2)(B)(i), 8 U.S.C. 125l(a)(2)(B)(i) (1994))

DEPORTATION " SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION VIOLATIONS

Nichols v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 136 S.Ct. 1113 (Apr. 4, 2016) (sex offender was not required under the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, 42 U.S.C. 16911(1), 16913(a), (c), to update his registration in Kansas once he left his home and moved to the Philippines, since SORNA did not apply to residents of foreign countries); abrogating United States v. Murphy, 664 F.3d 798 (10th Cir. Dec. 23, 2011). http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-5238_khlo.pdf

CAL CRIM DEF " AGGRAVATED FELONY " CRIMES OF VIOLENCE CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE " BATTERY CAUSING SERIOUS BODILY INJURY " MINIMUM FORCE CASES

See, e.g., People v. Hayes, 142 Cal. App. 4th 175 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2006) (defendant kicked a large ashtray, which fell over and hit an officers leg causing a cut and bruising); People v. Finta, 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7488 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. Oct. 17, 2012) (defendant shoved a man on his bicycle when he thought that the cyclist had stolen his personal property; cyclist fell and was injured); People v. Myers, (1998) 61 Cal. App. 4th 328 (victim yelled and poked at defendant and defendant pushed victim away defensively; victim slipped and fell on wet pavement and was injured).

DETENTION " IMMIGRATION DETENTION " ARRIVING ALIENS " NO ENTITLEMENT TO AN INDIVIDUALIZED BOND HEARING AFTER SIX MONTHS

Cardona v. Nalls-Castillo, ___ F.Supp.3d ___, 2016 WL 1553430 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 14, 2016) (8 U.S.C. 1225(b) authorizes detention of certain arriving aliens, including those who have been convicted of enumerated offenses, during the pendency of their removal proceedings, but does not provide for a bond hearing before an immigration judge).

IMMIGRATION OFFENSES " ILLEGAL REENTRY " SENTENCE "

Molina"Martinez v. United States, 136 S.Ct. 1338 (Apr. 20, 2016) (where there is an unpreserved error in calculating a Sentencing Guidelines range, a defendant is not required to provide additional evidence to show the error affected his or her substantial rights).

CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES " ARIZONA " PAULUS DEFENSE

Practice Advisory " Arizona " Paulus Unidentified Controlled Substance Defense
Two drugs on the Arizona controlled substances schedules are not on the federal list, so the unidentified substance defense and the unlisted substance defense apply. They are Benzylfentanyl and Thenylfentanyl. Thanks to Maris J. Liss.

IMMIGRATION OFFENSES " ILLEGAL REENTRY " STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS " DEFENDANT NOT FOUND IN U.S. WHEN HIS WIFE FILED IMMIGRATION PETITION

United States v. Ramirez-Salazar, ___ F.3d ___, 2016 WL 1457892 (1st Cir. Apr. 13, 2016) (defendant was not found in United States when his wife filed petition to facilitate defendant's immigration to United States, and thus statute of limitations for federal offense of being found in the U.S. after removal, under 8 U.S.C.

POST CON RELIEF " UNCONSTITUTIONAL STATUTE " RETROACTIVITY AGGRAVATED FELONY " CRIME OF VIOLENCE " 16(b)

Welch v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, No. 15-6418 (Apr. 18, 2016) (Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), applies retroactively to invalidate 16(b), no matter when the conviction occurred, because it is a substantive rule of criminal procedure, because it changed the substantive reach of the Armed Career Criminal Act, altering the range of conduct or the class of persons that the [Act] punishes.) (quoting Schriro v. Summerlin, 542 U.S. 348, 353 (2004)).

Note: This decision has substantial implications for anyone involved in immigration work for clients with criminal histories.

CRIMES OF MORAL TURPITUDE " THEFT " DE MINIMIS CONDUCT DOES NOT QUALIFY AS MORAL TURPITUDE

Jordan v. De George, 341 U.S. 223, 231-32, 71 S. Ct. 703, 708 (1951) (We have several times held that difficulty in determining whether certain marginal offenses are within the meaning of the language under attack as vague does not automatically render a statute unconstitutional for indefiniteness. . . . Whatever else the phrase crime involving moral turpitude may mean in peripheral cases, the decided cases make it plain that crimes in which fraud was an ingredient have always been regarded as involving moral turpitude.

 

TRANSLATE