Thompson v. Ridge, ___ F.Supp.2d __, 2005 WL 433277 (S.D. New York Feb. 24, 2005) (noncitizen found guilty following jury trial eligible for relief under 212(c) if s/he can show individual reliance upon the availability of 212(c) at the time of the plea).

Restropo v. McElroy, 354 F. Supp. 2d 254; 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2297 (E.D.N.Y. February 18, 2005) (respondent's service of more than five actual years in custody prior to issuance of deportation order, exclusive of pretrial time served, barred him from eligibility for INA 212(c) relief and precluded him from relying on availability of that relief; retroactive application of the repeal of 212(c) relief not unlawful).

Restropo v. McElroy, 354 F. Supp. 2d 254 (E.D.N.Y. February 18, 2005) (respondent's service of more than five actual years in custody prior to the issuance of the deportation order, exclusive of pretrial time served, barred him from eligibility for INA 212(c) relief and precluded him from relying on the availability of that relief so retroactive application of the repeal of 212(c) relief was not unlawful and it was unnecessary to decide whether pretrial custody, later credited against the sentence imposed, could form part of the custody necessary to trigger the five-year bar).

Comas v. McDonough, ___ F.Supp.2d ___ (D. Mass. March 23, 2005), following Matter of Balderas, 20 I & N Dec. 389 (BIA 1991); Molina-Amezcua v. INS, 6 F.3d 646, 647-48 (9th Cir. 1993) (holding that a conviction could be used as grounds for deportation of an alien as one of two crimes involving moral turpitude, even though the conviction had previously been waived under 212(c)); Molenda v. INS, 998 F.2d 291, 294-95 (5th Cir. 1993) (same).

Comas v. McDonough, ___ F.Supp.2d ___ (D. Mass. March 23, 2005) ("simultaneous" grants of INA 212(c) relief and cancellation of removal are not possible for persons with aggravated felony convictions because applicant would have to receive a 212(c) waiver before the cancellation, because otherwise he would clearly be banned from receiving a cancellation as an aggravated felon; the 212(c) waiver would have to be prior to the cancellation, but cancellation may not be granted where an applicant has already received relief under INA 212(c)).

Comas v. McDonough, ___ F.Supp.2d ___ (D. Mass. March 23, 2005) (case remanded to BIA to address issue of whether noncitizen may apply for INA 212(c) relief so that he may then become eligible for adjustment in conjunction with a waiver under INA 212(h)).

Nguyen v. District Director, Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, __ F3d __, 2005 WL 299702 (5th Cir. Feb. 9, 2005) (no due process violation where noncitizen applied for 212(c) relief, was denied relief based upon a misapplication of law, but then subsequently became barred for 212(c) relief by serving more than five years for an aggravated felony offense).

Alvarez-Hernandez v. Acosta, ___ F.3d ___, ___ n.19, 2005 WL 375683 (5th Cir. February 17, 2005) ("We find that the date of a plea of guilty, and not the date that judgment of conviction is ultimately entered, is determinative of whether the retroactive application of the IIRIRA bar to an aliens claim for 212(c) relief is impermissible under St. Cyr. Accordingly, because he pleaded guilty before the effective date of the IIRIRA, Alvarez is not precluded from seeking 212(c) relief.").

Alvarez-Hernandez v. Acosta, ___ F.3d ___, ___ n.19, 2005 WL 375683 (5th Cir. February 17, 2005) ("Our court has recognized the importance placed by the Supreme Court upon protecting the reliance interests of aliens who, prior to the IIRIRA, had waived their trial rights and entered guilty pleas in exchange for an opportunity to apply for 212(c) relief. See Ojeda-Terrazas v. Ashcroft, 290 F.3d 292, 301 (5th Cir. 2002) (The [St. Cyr] Court found that aliens, like St.

Alvarez-Hernandez v. Acosta, ___ F.3d ___, 2005 WL 375683 (5th Cir. Feb. 17, 2005) (noncitizen alien need not have accrued seven years of unrelinquished domicile at the time of plea in order to be eligible for INA 212(c) relief under INS v. St. Cyr; following rule that seven years for domicile for 212(c) stops at time of application for 212(c)).