United States v. Hernandez-Hernandez, ___ F.3d ___, ___ n.5, 2005 WL 3440815 (9th Cir. Dec. 16, 2005) (California conviction of felony false imprisonment, in violation of Penal Code 236, constitutes a divisible statute, encompassing some offenses that constitute crimes of violence within the meaning of U.S.S.G.

Matter of Mena, 17 I. & N. Dec. 38, Interim Decision (BIA) 2719, 1979 WL 44360 (BIA July 12, 1979) (transcript from court proceedings which resulted in conviction for possession of controlled substances at which the respondent, under questioning by judge as part of the arraignment prior to acceptance of a guilty plea, admitted possession of heroin, with knowledge that the substance was heroin, can be considered as part of the "record of conviction."). Matter of Paulus, 11 I & N Dec. 274 (BIA 1965), and Matter of Cassisi, 10 I & N. Dec. 136 (BIA 1963), distinguished.

Parrilla v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2005 WL 1606506 (9th Cir. July 11, 2005) (where guilty plea agrees that certification for determination of probable cause will be reviewed by the court in determining whether there is a factual basis for the plea and in sentencing, the document is included within the record of conviction for purpose of enabling the immigration court to consider the facts recited within it in determining the elements of the offense to which the defendant engtered a guilty plea, in assessing the immigration consequences).

Parrilla v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2005 WL 1606506 (9th Cir. July 11, 2005) ("Although police reports and complaint applications, standing alone, may not be used to enhance a sentence following a criminal conviction, Shepard, 125 S.Ct. at 1257, 1259-60, the contents of these documents may be considered if specifically incorporated into the guilty plea or admitted by a defendant. United States v.

A clerk's description of an offense in a California "Abstract of Conviction" does not establish which offense in a divisible statute was the offense of conviction. United States v. Navidad-Marcos, 367 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2004). The Abstract of Conviction has been used, however, to identify the charge or "count" to which a plea was entered. United States v. Velasco-Medina, 305 F.3d 839 (9th Cir. 2002).

United States v. Booker, 125 S.Ct. 738, 73 USLW 4056 (Jan. 12, 2005) (Sixth Amendment as construed by Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. ___ (2004), applies to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines because they are mandatory; advisory provisions would not implicate the Sixth Amendment, because judges may exercise broad discretion in imposing a sentence within a statutory range).

Abdelqadar v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2005 WL 1540245 (7th Cir. July 1, 2005) (affirming BIA conclusion that two convictions for violating 720 ILCS 5/17B-5 by illegally purchasing food stamps were not committed as part of a single scheme of criminal misconduct since the acts were distinct and neither offense caused the other).

United States v. Cornelio-Pena, ___ F.3d ___, ___ n.4, 2006 WL 218189 (10th Cir. Jan. 30, 2006) ("This court's determination of whether solicitation of burglary is a crime of violence under the Guidelines is not dictated by Arizona state law regarding whether solicitation is a crime of communication or a crime of violence. In Taylor v. United States, the Supreme Court rejected the contention that the term "burglary" in the Armed Career Criminal Act "means 'burglary' however a state chooses to define it." 495 U.S. 575, 579, 592, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607 (1990) (quotation omitted).

Ferreira v. Ashcroft, 390 F.3d 1091 (9th Cir. Dec. 1, 2004) (California conviction of welfare fraud, in violation of Welf. & Inst. Code 10980(c)(2), as interpreted by California judicial decisions defining the elements of the offense, invariably requires an element of fraud or deceit, even though the words of the statute do not, and the conviction therefore constitutes an offense involving fraud or deceit for purposes of qualifying as an aggravated felony as defined under INA 101(a)(43)(M)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(43)(M)(i) triggering deportation).

Singh v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2005 WL 3579002 (3d Cir. Jan. 3, 2006) ("We have held that another section of the Pennsylvania simple assault statute, 18 Pa. Cons.Stat. Ann. 2701(a)(1), which states that "[a] person is guilty of assault if he ... attempts to cause or intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes bodily injury to another," requires no more than a mens rea of recklessness, and therefore does not describe a crime of violence within the meaning of 16(a). Popal v. Gonzales, 416 F.3d 249, 254-55 (3d Cir. 2005) (citing Tran, 414 F.3d at 472).