Igwebuike v. Caterisano, ___ F.3d ___ , ___, 2007 WL 1180300 (4th Cir. April 20, 2007) ("An arrest or charge by itself is not substantial evidence of drug trafficking.

Igwebuike v. Caterisano, ___ F.3d ___ , 2007 WL 1180300 (4th Cir. April 20, 2007) (an arrest for drug trafficking, without any of the facts of the underlying arrest, is insufficient evidence to sustain a reason to believe charge; the DHS should have requested additional evidence; "The drug trafficking arrest, however, does raise underlying questions regarding eligibility, see 103.2(b)(8), and the Director was obliged to request further information, such as arrest or police reports, if he believed it was necessary to determine Igwebuike's eligibility for relief.

Senica v. INS, ___ F.3d ___, No. 92-70423 (9th Cir. Feb. 14, 1993) (parent's knowledge of a child's ineligibility for admission to the U.S. can be imputed to the child to preclude discretionary relief under INA 212(k); effectively prevents a parent from making a derivative claim for a waiver under INA 241(f) as the parent of a noncitizen lawfully admitted for permanent residence).

Soriano v. Gonzales, 414 F.3d 318 (5th Cir. Apr. 5, 2007) (any noncitizen seeking admission to the U.S. who participates in a scheme to aid other aliens in an illegal entry is inadmissible under INA 212(a)(6)(E)(i), regardless of whether the assisting individual was present at the border crossing).

De La Cruz v. Maurer, 483 F.3d 1013 (10th Cir. April 3, 2007) (procedural due process protections apply to noncitizens in removal proceedings: "when facing deportation ... aliens are entitled to procedural due process, which provides an opportunity to be heard at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner."), quoting United States v. Aguirre-Tello, 353 F.3d 1199, 1204 (10th Cir. 2004) (en banc).

De La Cruz v. Maurer, 483 F.3d 1013 (10th Cir. April 3, 2007) (rejecting argument that the INS's failure to apprise him that he was entitled to communicate with Mexican consular or diplomatic officers under the Vienna Convention and immigration regulations violates Article 36(1)(b) of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and 8 C.F.R. 236.1(e), on grounds the argument was waived because he failed to assert the issue before the IJ, and, in any event, Torres could not show that the violation resulted in any prejudice).

The Adam Walsh Act created a new statute for "civil commitment of a sexually dangerous person" and, with it, some difficult issues when advising your clients. Under 18 U.S.C. 4248, the Attorney General and/or the Director of the Bureau of Prisons may certify as a "sexually dangerous person" any person who is in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons or deemed incompetent or against whom all criminal charges have been dismissed solely because of the person's mental condition.

United States v. Zeng, __ F.Supp.2d __, 2007 WL 902380 (N.D.Cal. Mar, 22 2007) (granting motion to withdraw guilty plea where Rule 11 violation occurred because defendant was prevented, through cultural mores, from interrupting his attorney during the guilty plea phase, and defendant did not understand the nature of the charges against him, or the immigration consequences thereof, until he was later able to read a Chinese translation of the plea agreement).

Elkimya v. Department of Homeland Sec., 484 F.3d 151(2d Cir. Apr. 12, 2007) (court has jurisdiction to consider motion for bail pending resolution of appeal of BIA decision to the circuit court), citing Mapp v. Reno, 241 F.3d 221 (2d Cir.2001).

Even if client has made a false claim to U.S. citizenship, the false claim ground of inadmissibility requires it to be done for some "purpose or benefit" under federal or state law, which does not include an employment benefit. Matter of Oduor, A75 904 456 (BIA March 15, 2005), available on lexis and westlaw ("citizen or national" assertion on an I-9 form does not constitute a false claim of U.S. citizenship for either deportation or inadmissibility purposes).