Pazir v. Gonzales ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-1780
    MOHAMMAD PAZIR,
    Petitioner,
    versus
    ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
    Appeals. (A70-889-064)
    Submitted:   February 28, 2007            Decided:   March 15, 2007
    Before KING, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Pablo Santiago, Jr., LAW OFFICES OF PABLO SANTIAGO, JR., Fairfax,
    Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney
    General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, William C. Minick,
    OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Mohammad Pazir, a native and citizen of Pakistan, seeks
    review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals adopting and
    affirming     the    Immigration    Judge’s   (IJ)   finding    that   he   is
    ineligible for relief from removal.           Pazir contends that the IJ
    erred in finding that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily
    waived his right to counsel at the February 5, 2004 hearing.                We
    have reviewed the record and conclude that this contention is
    without merit.       See Delgado-Corea v. INS, 
    804 F.2d 261
    , 263 (4th
    Cir. 1986).         Next, we reject Pazir’s claims that the IJ and
    government     counsel    behaved    inappropriately    and    unfairly,    or
    violated his right to due process, at the February 5, 2004 hearing.
    See Rusu v. INS, 
    296 F.3d 316
    , 320 (4th Cir. 2002).              Finally, we
    find no abuse of discretion in the IJ’s denial of a continuance
    from the March 1, 2004 hearing.        See 
    8 C.F.R. § 1003.29
     (2006).
    We accordingly deny the petition for review. We dispense
    with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
    would not aid the decisional process.
    PETITION DENIED
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-1780

Judges: King, Traxler, Shedd

Filed Date: 3/15/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024