Vargas v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., ___ F.3d ___ 2006 WL 1689293 (10th Cir. Jun. 21, 2006) (Colorado conviction of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, in violation of CRS 18-6-701, may be violated by encouraging a child to violated any state law, from jaywalking to murder; since conviction under this statute requires proof, as an element of the offense, of a specified predicate offense, it was proper to look to the charging document to determine the predicate offense; violation of CRS 18-6-701 where the predicate offense was a violation of C.R.S.

Vargas v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., ___ F.3d ___ 2006 WL 1689293 (10th Cir. Jun. 21, 2006) (Colorado conviction of contributing to the delinquency of a minor, in violation of CRS 18-6-701, may be violated by encouraging a child to violated any state law, from jaywalking to murder; since conviction under this statute requires proof, as an element of the offense, of a specified predicate offense, it was proper to look to the charging document to determine the predicate offense; violation of CRS 18-6-701 where the predicate offense was a violation of C.R.S.

Alexandre v. U.S. Attorney Gen., __ F.3d __ (11th Cir. Jun. 20, 2006) (section 106 of the REAL ID Act does not violate the Suspension Clause of the U.S. Constitution in expressly foreclosing habeas review, because the statute provides for an alternative means for review through direct appeal).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/11th/0515421p.pdf

Cisneros-Perez v. Gonzales, ___ F.3d ___, 2006 WL 1728068 (9th Cir. Jun. 26, 2006) (distinguishing between INA 237(a)(2)(E)(i), and 8 U.S.C. 921(a)(33)(A)(i) [sentence enhancement for person with prior domestic violence conviction found in possession of a firearm], in that the former requires that the domestic relationship be an element of the offense, where the latter merely requires that the offense was in fact committed against someone with a domestic relationship), distinguishing United States v. Belless, 338 F.3d 1063, 1065-1067 (9th Cir. 2003).

If restitution is ordered, even in excess of $10,000, for losses specifically noted as flowing from “relevant conduct that was not charged," it would not qualify a fraud offense as an aggravated felony. Thanks to Mat Millen for this argument.

United States v. Perez-Pena, __ F.3d __ (4th Cir. Jun. 30, 2006) (Florida conviction for felony lewd, lascivious, or indecent act upon a child, factually involving a sexual relationship between a 12 year old and a 21 year old, found to be a crime of violence for illegal re-entry sentencing purposes), following United States v. Pierce, 278 F.3d 282, 289-90 (4th Cir. 2002).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/4th/055054p.pdf

Linda Drazga Maxfield & Keri Burchfield, Immigration Offenses Involving Unlawful Entry: Is Federal Practice Comparable Across Districts?, 14 Fed. Sent. R. 260, Mar.-Apr.2002.

Esponda v. U.S. Atty Gen., 453 F.3d 1319 (11th Cir. Jun. 28, 2006) (BIA abused its discretion in dismissing appeal based on failure to submit brief without first determining whether the issues were adequately stated in the notice to appeal; whether BIA was correct in summarily dismissing an appeal where no brief was filed is reviewed for abuse of discretion).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/11th/0513875p.pdf

Fernandez-Vargas v. Gonzales, 548 U.S. ___ (2006) (INA 241(a)(5) applies to persons who illegally reentered prior to the April 1, 1997 effective date of IIRIRA, and who did not take any affirmative steps towards legalizing status before that date, because unlawful presence following reentry is a continuing act), reversing Bejjani v. INS, 271 F.3d 670 (6th Cir. 2001), Castro-Cortez et al. v. INS, 239 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2001).
http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/us/000/041376.html

Mouelle v. Gonzales, 126 S.Ct. 2964 (Jun. 26, 2006) (denying cert. and vacating decision in Mouelle v. Gonzales, 416 F.3d 923 (8th Cir. Jul 29, 2005) for further consideration of new interim regulation, effective May 12, 2006).