Shepard v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 125 S.Ct. 1254 (March 7, 2005) (a court sentencing under the Armed Career Criminal Act may not look to police reports or complaint applications to determine whether an earlier guilty plea necessarily admitted, and supported a conviction for, generic burglary so as to serve as a predicate offense for a sentence enhancement).

A police report - whether relating to an existing or overturned conviction - is not admissible in removal proceedings to prove the nature of the conviction/ground of inadmissibility or deportability that is charged based on the conviction. The Board has held that police reports are not a part of the record of conviction that may be examined when a statute is divisible, i.e., when it describes some offenses that constitute the immigration violation alleged and some that do not. See Matter of Teixeira, 21 I&N Dec. 316, 319 (BIA 1996).

Fequierre v. Ashcroft, 279 F.3d 1325 (11th Cir. 2002) (testimony that noncitizen was convicted of deportable offense can constitute sufficient evidence to affirm BIA determination that noncitizen is deportable); cf. Adefemi v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1022 (11th Cir. September 28, 2004) (dictum).

United States v. Allen, 282 F.3d 339 (5th Cir. 2002) (district court improperly relied on police report to determine whether prior conviction was a "serious drug offense" under 18 U.S.C. 924(e)(2)(A)(ii)).

United States v. Turner, 349 F.3d 833, 836 (5th Cir. 2003) (refusing to consider charging document in order to determine whether prior conviction was a crime of violence under USSG 4B1.2(a)(2), since defendant had pleaded guilty to a lesser offense; "a district court may not rely on a charging document without first establishing that the crime charged was the same crime for which the defendant was convicted." quoting United States v. Spell, 44 F.3d 936, 940 (11th Cir. 1995)).

United States v. Insaulgarat, 378 F.3d 456 (5th Cir. July 19, 2004) (police reports inadmissible as part of record of conviction, even if they fall within business or official records exception to hearsay rule, citing Federal Rule of Evidence 803(8)(B)).

United States v. Navidad-Marcos, 367 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. May 5, 2004) (California conviction of violating Health & Safety Code 11397(a), did not constitute an aggravated felony for purposes of enhancement of illegal reentry sentence pursuant to U.S.S.G. 2K1.2(b)(1)(A)(i), since the charge of conviction was in the disjunctive language of the statute, and the label of the offense in the abstract of judgment was not admissible to narrow the offense).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0310234p.pdf

decision, the Board agreed with ICE that a returning resident was an applicant for admission under section 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(13)(C)(v), INA 101(a)(13)(C)(v) because ICE had a reason to believe that the respondent was a trafficker. ICE argued that because it had reason to believe, the respondent had committed an offense an offense identified in section 212(a)(2), and having committed such offense, the respondent was an applicant for admission. The BIA held that 8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)(2), INA 240(c)(2) puts the burden on a returning LPR to show that he is not an applicant for admission.

     Several sections of the immigration statute that impose penalties for a conviction specifically include conspiracy and attempt to commit the offense. These include the definition of aggravated felony, the ground of inadmissibility and deportability relating to a controlled substance conviction, and the firearms deportation ground. INA 101(a)(43)(U), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(U).

United States v. Stewart, ___ F.3d ___ (9th Cir. November 13, 2003) (conviction for machine gun possession is reversed where 18 U.S.C. 922(o) is an invalid exercise of Congress's commerce Power, as it lacks any jurisdictional element; conviction for possession of firearms by a felon affirmed)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0210318p.pdf