United States v. Portillo-Mendoza,
273 F.3d 1224, 1226 (9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2001) (California DUI
conviction with priors in violation of California Vehicle
Code § 23152 and 23550 was not an aggravated felony for purposes
of enhancing a sentence for illegal re-entry).

United States v. Trinidad-Aquino,
259 F.3d 1140 (9th Cir. Aug. 8, 2001) (California conviction
for driving under influence of alcohol with injury to another,
a violation of California Vehicle Code § 23153, was not "crime
of violence," and thus was not "aggravated felony"
under INA § 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(F) and did
not warrant 16-level increase of illegal re-entry sentence
under U.S.S.G.

Bazan-Reyes v. INS,
256 F.3d 600 (7th Cir. July 5, 2001) (Illinois conviction
for felony drunk driving under 625 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 5/11-501(d)(1),
because of two prior DUI convictions, was not "crime
of violence" under INA § 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(F),
for deportation purposes).

Bazan-Reyes v. INS,
256 F.3d 600, 603 (7th Cir. July 5, 2001) (Indiana conviction
of a Class D felony, Operating a Vehicle While Intoxicated,
with prior convictions, in violation of section 9-30-5-3 of
the Indiana Code, with a sentence to three years imprisonment,
was not an aggravated felony "crime of violence"
under INA § 101(a)(43)(F), 8 U.S.C.

United States v. Torres-Ruiz,
387 F.3d 1179 (10th Cir. Nov. 2, 2004) (California conviction
for felony driving under the influence of alcohol did not
constitute a "crime of violence" for purposes of
enhancing a federal sentence for illegal re-entry).

Li v. Ashcroft,
389 F.3d 892, 897 (9th Cir. Nov. 19, 2004) (federal conviction
of making a false claim against the United States, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 287, is divisible with respect to the fraud
offense aggravated felony defined in INA § 101(a)(43)(M)(i),
8 U.S.C.

Abreu-Reyes v. INS, 292 F.3d 1029
(9th Cir. June 10, 2002) (federal conviction of subscribing
to a false tax return, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7206(1),
constituted an aggravated felony as a fraud offense under
INA § 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(M)(i) for removal
purposes), opinion withdrawn on grant of rehearing by, 350
F.3d 966 (9th Cir. Nov. 21, 2003).

Matter of Onyido, 22 I. &
N. Dec. 552 (BIA Mar.

Randhawa v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d
1148 (9th Cir. Aug. 13, 2002) (federal conviction for possession
of stolen mail, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1708, held to
be an "aggravated felony" triggering deportation,
since the full range of conduct prohibited by the criminal
statute fell within the aggravated felony definition of a
"theft offense" under INA § 101(a)(43)(G), 8 U.S.C.
§ 1101(a)(43)(G)).

Lara-Chacon v. Ashcroft, 345
F.3d 1148 (9th Cir. Oct. 10, 2003) (BIA improperly relied
upon presentence report in finding Arizona conviction for
conspiracy to commit money laundering in violation of Ariz.
Rev. Stat. §§ 13-1003, 12-2317(A)(1), (C) was a drug trafficking
crime where presentence report indicated respondent was a
drug dealer and the offense involved 15 pounds of marijuana).