United States v. Arqueta-Ramos, 730 F.3d 1133 (No. 10-10618) (9th Cir. Sept. 20, 2013) (vacating misdemeanor plea to illegal entry into the U.S., in violation of 8 U.S.C.

United States v. Blas, 2013 WL 5317228 (SD Ala. September 20, 2013) (right to bail under 28 U.S.C. 3142 trumps ICE detainer); see Lena Graber, Practice Advisory, NIP/NLG http://nationalimmigrationproject.org/legalresources/practice_advisories...

Matter of Douglas, 26 I&N Dec. 197 (BIA 2013) (a child who has satisfied the conditions of former section INA 321(a) before turning 18 has acquired United States citizenship, regardless of whether the naturalized parent acquired legal custody of the child before or after the naturalization).

Note that the BIA refused to follow Jordon v. Attorney General of U.S., 424 F.3d
320 (3d Cir. 2005).

People v. Peque, 22 N.Y.3d 168 (N.Y. Nov. 19, 2014) (defendants are entitled to notice that deportation may ensue from a guilty plea; however, failure of court to provide immigration advisal does not entitle defendants to automatic vacatur; defendant must establish prejudice), overruling People v. Ford, 86 N.Y.2d 397 (1995).

United States v. Ali, 735 F.3d 176 (4th Cir. Nov. 14, 2013) (prosecution only needed to show defendants knew the that they distributed contained a controlled substance, and did not need to prove what the defendants knew the identity of the particular substance).

Burt v. Titlow, ___U.S. ___ (Nov. 5, 2013) (Sixth Circuit failed to accord the "double deference" AEDPA mandates federal habeas judges grant to (1) the state court's determination and (2) the presumption of competence accorded counsel); but see ___ (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (stressing the limited scope of the Court's ruling; although defendant possesses "the ultimate authority" to determine her plea, a lawyer must abide by client's decision only after having provided the client with competent and fully informed advice).

Ex parte Roldan, __ S.W.3d __ (Tex.App. Nov. 19, 2013) (defendants whose convictions became final prior to Padilla v. Kentucky cannot benefit from the holding in that case).

Note: Chaidez only held that the failure to advise portion of Padilla was not retroactive, but pointed out that the affirmative misrepresentation portion may be viable before Padilla depending on the law in the particular jurisdiction, since many courts had recognized this affirmative misrepresentation claim well before Padilla. See Practice Advisory on Chaidez at www.nationalimmigrationproject.org.

Murillo-Prado v. Holder, __ F.3d __ (9th Cir. Nov. 20, 2013) (Arizona conviction for illegally conducting an enterprise is not categorically an aggravated felony RICO conviction, but the record of conviction established respondent was convicted of aggravated felony racketeering).

Note: This holding may be inconsistent with Bautista v. Atty Gen. of the U.S., ___ F.3d ___ (3d Cir. Feb. 21, 2014)(New York conviction of attempted arson in the third degree, in violation of Penal Law 110 and 150.10, did not categorically constitute a match for the elements of 18 U.S.C.

Matter of Oppedisano, 26 I. & N. Dec. 202 (BIA 2013) (federal conviction of unlawful possession of ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g), is an aggravated felony for immigration purposes; the relating to language used in the Act is does not limit the scope of the statute).
http://www.justice.gov/eoir/vll/intdec/vol26/3793.pdf

Shunaula v. Holder, 732 F.3d 143 (2d Cir. Oct. 16, 2013) (court of appeals lacked subject-matter jurisdiction to review alien's collateral attack of prior expedited removal, because claim that prior removal violated due process did not challenge the expedited removal system generally, its implementing regulations, or any written policies, and government was not seeking to use the prior expedited removal as an element of a criminal offense).