In People v. Kim, 212 Cal.App.4th 117, 151 Cal.Rptr.3d 154, (6th Dist. Dec. 19, 2012), the Sixth District held that judgment had been imposed and defendant had served his prison sentence in this case. The trial court therefore had no authority to dismiss the action pursuant to section 1385.

(Jan. 8, 2013) (immigration laws are enforced more strictly now than ever before: the DHS reported record numbers of removals during the Obama Administration, while fewer noncitizens are trying to enter the country illegally, and those caught by the Border Patrol are now regularly charged with federal crimes. Together, these trends reflect a sweeping and punitive transformation in U.S. immigration enforcement.

Ineffective assistance of counsel voids a guilty plea (which is supposed to be a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of many rights) if there is prejudice, i.e., a reasonable probability of a different outcome absent counsels error. The most recent all-jurisdiction Supreme Court statement of this principle is found in Missouri v. Frye, 132 S.Ct. 1399 (March 21, 2012). The court there held that the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel extends to the consideration of plea offers that lapse or are rejected.

Missouri v. Frye, 132 S.Ct. 1399, 1411 (March 21, 2012) (The Court has established the minimum requirements of the Sixth Amendment as interpreted in Strickland, and States have the discretion to add procedural protections under state law if they choose.).

United States v. Garcia-Sandobal, 703 F.3d 1278, 2013 WL 28255 (11th Cir. Jan. 3, 2013) (although defendant initially object[ed] to the characterization of his prior conviction as an aggravated felony, and purported to preserve a right to challenge the classification of his prior conviction at sentence, but later unequivocally pleaded guilty to a violation of 18 U.S.C. 1326(b)(2) and agreed that he had been removed following a conviction for an aggravated felony; Eleventh Circuit held that a defendant cannot plead guilty but preserve this challenge); see United States v.

Ryan v. Valencia Gonzales, 568 U.S. ___, 133 S.Ct. 696, 184 L.Ed.2d 528 (Jan. 8, 2013) (the Courts of Appeals for the Ninth and Sixth Circuits both erred in holding that district courts must stay federal habeas proceedings when state prisoner-petitioners are adjudged incompetent; neither 18 U.S.C. 3599 nor 18 U.S.C. 4241 provides such a right).

Zhu v. U.S. Attys Gen, 703 F.3d 1303 (11th Cir. Jan 4, 2013) (BIA improperly engaged in de novo review of IJs factual findings; 8 C.F.R. 1003.1(d)(3) allows BIA to review IJs factual finding for clear error only).

Martinez-Lopez v. Holder, 704 F.3d 169 (1st Cir. Jan. 4, 2013) (noncitizen may not raise new legal theories for eligibility for relief on a motion to reconsider that, though previously available, were not previously asserted).

Wanjiru v. Holder, 705 F.3d 258 (7th Cir. Jan. 11, 2013) (court has jurisdiction to review denial of a request for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture; INA 242(a)(2)(C) does not bar review).

A practice advisory on provisional waivers of unlawful presence is available here: http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=42954