United States v. Avery, 719 F.3d 1080, 1084 (9th Cir. Jun. 18, 2013) (As we have stated in other contexts, plea agreements are contracts, and are premised on the notion that the negotiated guilty plea represents a bargained-for quid pro quo. United States v.

Rivas v. Napolitano, 714 F.3d 1108 (9th Cir. Apr. 25, 2013) (court lacked jurisdiction to compel immigration authorities to act upon alien's visa application, but doctrine of consular nonreviewability did not bar federal court's jurisdiction over alien's action to require immigration authorities to act upon his request for reconsideration of the denial of the application).

Gonzaga-Ortega v. Holder, __ F.3d __ (9th Cir. Jun. 7, 2013) (border officers were permitted to treat noncitizen as applicant for admission based on conclusion that noncitizen had engaged in illegal activity, without waiting for a final administrative determination; statement was not coerced).

Corro Barragan v. Holder, __ F.3d __ (9th Cir. Jun. 10, 2013) (a noncitizen must have one year of uninterrupted physical presence in the United States in order to be eligible for voluntary departure under 8 U.S.C. 1229c(b)), agreeing with Medina Tovar v. U.S. Att'y Gen., 646 F.3d 1300, 1306 (11th Cir. 2011).

The Practice Advisory "UPDATE: Using the California Chart and Notes After Moncrieffe v. Holder and Olivas-Motta v. Holder" provides a brief overview of the holdings in the Supreme Court Moncrieffe decision and the Ninth Circuit Olivas-Motta decision. It also sets out a preliminary update on some Calif. offenses in the Calif. Notes & Chart. The 2013 version of the Calif. Notes and Chart is available for download at www.ilrc.org/crimes.

Al-Amyn Sumar, PRACTICE ADVISORY, Understanding and Mitigating the Effect of Suspended Sentences, discusses the immigration consequences of suspended sentences, provides background about the governing statutory framework and case law, and suggests strategies for softening their potential impact. http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/6503708/904649546/name/Practice%20Advisory_...

In California, marijuana includes concentrated cannabis which includes both hashish and hash oil. E.g., Health & Safety Code 11357(b) (marijuana, other than concentrated cannabis), (c), (d), (e). Compare 11357(a), which refers only to concentrated cannabis, and does not mention marijuana. The Paulus defense can sometimes be used in California marijuana cases by trying to plead up from the lower sentences of
the various marijuana offenses (e.g., possession for sale under 11359) to possession for sale under 11351 (which includes opiates, heroin, cocaine, and, notably, synthetic THC).

Revised 2012 ICE Detainer Guidance: Who It Covers, Who It Does Not, & the Problems that Remain. The National Immigrant Project (NIP) and the Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC) announce Practice Advisory regarding the December 2012 ICE Detainer Guidance & Form: In December 2012, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced new ICE detainer guidance and issued a new detainer form which it claimed would result in the issuance of fewer detainers. The attached Practice Advisory provides guidance surrounding what this change actually means.

United States v. Windsor, __ S.Ct. __ (Jun. 26, 2013) (the Defense of Marriage Acts violated equal protection by denying federal benefits to gay married couples).

Descamps v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, ___ (Jun. 20, 2013) (California conviction of burglary, in violation of Penal Code 459 (entry without requiring unlawful entry with intent to commit theft or any felony), is overbroad with respect to the generic federal definition of burglary, for purposes of federal sentence enhancement under the ACCA for a prior burglary conviction, because generic unlawful entry is never an element of 459, a conviction under that statute is never for generic burglary.).