Conteh v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. Aug. 22, 2006) (Federal conviction for conspiracy under 18 U.S.C. 371, where the underlying offense was a violation of 18 U.S.C. 513(a) [possession of counterfeit security] with a loss in excess of $10,000, is an aggravated felony fraud offense for immigration purposes).
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/051282.html

Conteh v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. Aug. 22, 2006) (BIA may look to restitution amount ordered to determine loss to the victim).

Conteh v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. Aug. 22, 2006) (BIA may look to restitution amount ordered to determine loss to the victim).

Conteh v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. Aug. 22, 2006) (documents listed at 8 C.F.R. 1003.41 are used to determine existence of conviction, not to determine under categorical analysis whether conviction triggers ground of removal; pre-sentence investigation is not part of the record of conviction for purposes of determining nature of conviction, only existence).

Conteh v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. Aug. 22, 2006) (documents listed at 8 C.F.R. 1003.41 are used to determine existence of conviction, not to determine under categorical analysis whether conviction triggers ground of removal; pre-sentence investigation is not part of the record of conviction for purposes of determining nature of conviction, only existence).

Conteh v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. Aug. 22, 2006) (defining "modified categorical" analysis to be an examination of the record of conviction beyond the second step of the Taylor/Shepard categorical analysis; rather than being limited to looking to the record of conviction to determine the elements of the crime to which the noncitizen admitted or was found guilty of committing, immigration authorities may look to any facts in the record of conviction to determine nature of the conviction, including those facts to which the noncitizen did not admit or was not found guilty). Compare Li v.

Conteh v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 21422 (1st Cir. August 22, 2006) (respondent's testimony during removal proceedings is not part of record of conviction, for purposes of determining whether conviction constitutes aggravated felony for removal purposes), following Matter of Pichardo-Sufren, 21 I&N Dec. 330, 333-36 (BIA 1996).

Conteh v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 21422 (1st Cir. August 22, 2006) (indictment report is part of record of conviction, for purposes of determining whether conviction constitutes aggravated felony for removal purposes).

Conteh v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 21422 (1st Cir. August 22, 2006) (judgment is part of record of conviction, for purposes of determining whether conviction constitutes aggravated felony for removal purposes).

United States v. Hernandez-Garduno, __ F.3d __ (10th Cir. Aug. 21, 2006) (Colorado assault conviction, in violation of Colo. Rev. Stat. 18-3-204, is not categorically a crime of violence for illegal re-entry sentencing purposes).
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/042224.html