United States v. Lopez-DeLeon, 513 F.3d 472 (5th Cir. Jan. 9, 2008) (California conviction of statutory rape, under Penal Code 261.5(c), was sexual abuse of a minor for illegal re-entry sentencing purposes, even though conviction statute was overbroad, where dismissed charge indicated that the victim was 14 years old).

Matter of Aruna, 24 I.& N. Dec. 452 (BIA 2008) (Maryland misdemeanor conviction for violation of Maryland Criminal Law 5-602, distribution of a controlled substance, is an drug trafficking aggravated felony because the offense would be a felony if prosecuted under federal law; 21 U.S.C. 841(b)(4), which treats distribution of a small amount of marijuana without remuneration as a misdemeanor is not a separate federal offense, but rather a "mitigating exception" to the federal felony offense; therefore the categorical analysis is inapplicable to that section).

Diaz v. Kelly, 515 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. Jan. 25, 2008) (the need for an interpreter might not apply if petitioner does not take sufficient action to secure assistance).

United States v. Tellez-Martinez, 517 F.3d 813 (5th Cir. Feb.

Samirah v. Mukasey, __ F.Supp.3d __, 2008 WL 450823 (N.D. Ill., E.D., Feb. 13, 2008) ("[T]he government cannot bypass the mandatory step of a removal hearing by granting plaintiff advance parole, revoking that parole while the plaintiff is outside of the United States, and then refusing to allow him to return to the United States. ... The Attorney General is directed to allow plaintiff to return to the United States, or to wherever the removal hearing is to proceed, within 60 days of the date of this order.")

Santos v. Mukasey, 516 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. Feb. 13, 2008) (although that Government bears the burden of proving alienage, once given, the burden shifts to the noncitizen to show, by a fair preponderance of the evidence, proof of derivative citizenship).

Singh v. USDHS, 517 F.3d 638 (2d Cir. Feb.29, 2008) (immigration judge did not err in relying on (1) the "Conditions of Probation"; (2) the "Certificate of Disposition"; and (3) "rap sheets" together to find that respondent was convicted of particular subdivision [N.Y.P.L. 120.05(1)] of divisible statute).

Singh v. USDHS, 517 F.3d 638 (2d Cir. Feb.29, 2008) (immigration judge did not err in relying on the "Conditions of Probation" to find that respondent was convicted of particular subdivision [N.Y.P.L. 120.05(1)] of divisible statute, since the Conditions of Probation, which was signed by a court official, clearly falls into the categories of "[a]n official record of ... sentence," as well as "[a]ny document or record prepared by, or under the direction of, the court in which the conviction was entered."), quoting 8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)(3)(B)(ii), (vi); cf.

Singh v. USDHS, 517 F.3d 638 (2d Cir. Feb.29, 2008) ("However, Francis also held that an IJ may admit a rap sheet as partial evidence of such a conviction."), citing Francis v. Gonzales, 442 F.3d 131, 142-43 (2d Cir. 2006) (concluding that 8 U.S.C. 1229a(c)(3)(B) provides which documents "constitute conclusive proof of conviction" but does not prohibit the admission of a rap sheet as "some evidence of a criminal conviction").

Singh v. USDHS, 517 F.3d 638 (2d Cir. Feb.29, 2008) ("immigration judge "errs in relying on a rap sheet as conclusive proof that an alien has been convicted of a particular crime for the purpose of the alien's removal proceedings. . . . " [emphasis in original]), citing Francis v. Gonzales, 442 F.3d 131, 143 (2d Cir. 2006).