Martinez v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 532 (5th Cir. Mar. 11, 2008) ("Here, defining "admitted", as used in 212(h), to exclude adjustment to LPR status subsequent to entry, as was done by Martinez, is bolstered by the "longstanding principle of construing any lingering ambiguities in deportation statutes in favor of the alien". Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. at 449, 107 S.Ct. 1207 (citations omitted). This canon of construction, comparable to the rule of lenity in criminal cases, is based on the drastic nature of removal.

Ramirez v. Mukasey, 520 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. Mar. 14, 2008) (judicial decisions defining the elements of the offense of conviction are considered by immigration court in determining the nature of the offense of conviction).

United States v. Murillo, ___ F.Supp.2d ___, 2008 WL 697160 (N.D. Iowa Mar. 13, 2008) (a "social security card" does not constitute a "means of identification" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 1546(b) and 8 U.S.C. 1324a(b), so the court grants defendant's motion to dismiss Count 3); United States v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 258 F. Supp. 2d 809 (E.D. Tenn. 2003) (a "social security card" is not a "means of identification" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 1546(b), even if this creates a "loophole" or appears inconsistent with 18 U.S.C. 1546(a)).

RELIEF - 212(H) WAIVER - 30 GRAM MARIJUANA EXCEPTION - DRUG PARAPHERNALIA
Escobar-Barraza v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 388 (7th Cir. Mar. 13, 2008) (noncitizen qualified for a waiver of inadmissibility, under INA 212(h), 8 U.S.C. 1182(h), on account of a controlled substances conviction, since his conviction for possession of drug paraphernalia related to a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana).

Toledo-Hernandez v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 332 (5th Cir. Mar. 12, 2008) ("[I]f the BIA has never been given the opportunity to consider an issue but has the mechanisms to remedy it, even where the 90-day period for presenting a motion to reopen has passed, a petitioner must first present the issue to the Board in the form of a motion to reopen for exceptional circumstances. Toledo does not dispute that he has not raised the issue of his vacated convictions before the BIA, nor does he contend that the BIA has inadequate mechanisms to address and remedy his claim.

Ochoa v. Bass, 181 P.3d 727 (Okla. Ct. Crim. App. Mar. 12, 2008) (trial court had probable cause to believe defendants were unlawfully present in United States in violation of federal civil or criminal law, and therefore had authority to commit them to the county sheriff's custody for notification of ICE; once ICE failed to timely respond to that notification, or timely responded by lodging a detainer but neglected to assume custody within time allowed by law, no further state detention was warranted or authorized by law, absent any independent state ground for further detention).

The TPS statute, INA 244(c)(2)(A)(iii)(I), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)(2)(A)(iii)(I), states the Attorney General cannot waive INA 212(a)(2)(A) grounds of inadmissibility (controlled substance and CMT), for TPS applicants. The very next paragraph, however, provides the Attorney General cannot waive inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(2)(C)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(C)(i) (reason to believe illicit drug trafficking), "except for ... a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana." INA 244(c)(2)(A)(iii)(II), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)(2)(A)(iii)(I).

http://www.immigrationadvocates.org/

Mohamed v. Tebrake, 371 F.Supp.2d 1043 (D. Minn. 2005) (IJ must inquire as to respondents mental competency, or 8 CFR 1240.4 would be a nullity, and it was an abuse of discretion not to inquire where person was in a mental hospital and hearing was held via circuit television).

James v. Mukasey, 522 F.3d 250 (2d Cir. Mar. 25, 2008) ("We reminded the District Court that "[f]actual matters considered as a basis for sentence must have some minimal indicium of reliability beyond mere allegation," and that "an indictment is not meant to serve an evidentiary function. Its primary purpose is to acquaint the defendant with the specific crime with which he is charged...." Id. at 701 (internal quotations marks omitted) (alteration in original).