RELIEF - 212(C) RELIEF - GUILTY PLEA - FIVE YEAR BAR
Alexandre v. U.S. Attorney Gen., __ F.3d __ (11th Cir. Jun. 20, 2006) (although recognizing that the five-year bar does not apply to pre-IMMACT 90 conviction, the court held that St. Cyr foreclosed 212(c) relief for persons convicted by jury trial).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/11th/0515421p.pdf
RELIEF - 212(C) RELIEF - GUILTY PLEA - FIVE YEAR BAR
Alexandre v. U.S. Attorney Gen., __ F.3d __ (11th Cir. Jun. 20, 2006) (although recognizing that the five-year bar does not apply to pre-IMMACT 90 conviction, the court held that St. Cyr foreclosed 212(c) relief for persons convicted by jury trial).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/11th/0515421p.pdf
RELIEF - VOLUNTARY DEPARTURE - NO AUTHORITY TO EXTEND AFTER EXPIRATION
Onikoyi v. Gonzales, __ F.3d __ (1st Cir. Jun. 16, 2006) (no jurisdiction to reinstate voluntary departure period after it has already expired).
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/1st/052426.html
CITIZENSHIP - NATIONAL OF UNITED STATES
Omolo v. Gonzales, 452 F.3d 404 (5th Cir. Jun. 12, 2006) (person may become a national only by birth or by completing the naturalization process) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/5th/0510192cv0p.pdf
CITIZENSHIP
Hosein v. Gonzales, 452 F.3d 401 (5th Cir. Jun. 12, 2006) (dismissal of plaintiff-mother's claim that her citizenship should be backdated in order to effectuate citizenship for her son in order to allow him to avoid deportation).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/5th/0520460cv0p.pdf
GOOD MORAL CHARACTER - SODOMY
Nemetz v. INS, 647 F.2d 432 (4th Cir. 1981) (conviction under Virginia law making consensual sodomy a crime would not bar naturalization).
DETENTION - POST CON - INS HOLDS - CHALLENGING AFTER RELEASE FROM CRIMINAL CUSTODY
8 CFR 242.2(a)(4) allows state or federal officials can hold noncitizens for 48 hours (excluding weekends and holidays) based on an DHS detainer request. Bill pending in congress would extend this period to 14 days.
CATEGORICAL ANALYSIS - CONSIDERATION OF STATE JUDICIAL DECISIONS
Ortega-Mendez v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2006 WL 1642755 (9th Cir. Jun. 15, 2006) (looking to California state law to determine meaning of "force or violence" in California Penal Code 242).
On August 30, 2006, the government filed a petition for rehearing in Ortega-Mendez v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 1010 (9th Cir. 2006).
JUDICIAL REVIEW - CIRCUIT PANEL FREE TO DEVIATE FROM EARLIER DECISION WHERE REASONING OR THEORY OF PRIOR DECISION IS CLEARLY IRRECONCILABLE WITH INTERVENING HIGHER AUTHORITY
Ortega-Mendez v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 1010 (9th Cir. Jun. 15, 2006) ("As Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889 (9th Cir.2003) (en banc), explained, a three-judge panel may not itself overrule a prior decision of the court, id. at 899, but "where the reasoning or theory of our prior circuit authority is clearly irreconcilable with the reasoning or theory of intervening higher authority," id. at 893, three-judge panels "should consider themselves bound by the intervening higher authority and reject the prior opinion of this court as having been effectively overruled," id. at 900.
JUDICIAL REVIEW -- DEFERENCE
Ortega-Mendez v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 1010 (9th Cir. Jun. 15, 2006) ("We do not defer to BIA interpretations of state law or of provisions of the federal criminal code referenced within, but not part of, the Immigration and Nationality Act.") See Parrilla v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 1038, 1041 (9th Cir.2005); Singh v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1228, 1230-31 (9th Cir.2004).
On August 30, 2006, the government filed a petition for rehearing in Ortega-Mendez v. Gonzales, 450 F.3d 1010 (9th Cir. 2006).