U.S. v. Cisneros-Resendiz, No. 10-50521 (9-6-11) (Ikuta with Rymer and Tallman).

The 9th considers again prejudice from an IJ failing to provide information about potentially available discretionary relief from an entry of a removal order. This comes in the wake of U.S. v. Barajas-Alvarado, No. 10-50134, 2011 WL 3689244 (9th Cir. Aug. 24, 2011). The 9th focuses on the withdrawal of an application of admission. The 9th holds that there was no prejudice because the calibration on such discretion does not weigh equities, such as family or cultural ties, but "interests of justice" as to the causes of inadmissibility.

Ybarra v. McDaniel, No. 07-99019 (9-6-11) (Tallman with Silverman and Clifton).

The 9th affirms the denial of a petition seeking capital relief. The 9th finds error in dismissing a claim raising the issue of impartial jury because of failure to exhaust, but still does not grant relief. The 9th also finds error in finding a claim raising prosecutorial misconduct unexhausted. It was exhausted, but still no relief was forthcoming. The 9th denies relief on various IAC claims.