Katalin Horvath v. Eric Holder, Jr. ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            OCT 15 2012
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    KATALIN EVA HORVATH,                             No. 11-70002
    Petitioner,                       Agency No. A029-456-331
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted October 9, 2012 **
    Before:        RAWLINSON, MURGUIA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
    Katalin Eva Horvath, a native and citizen of Hungary, petitions pro se for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal
    from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her motion to reopen proceedings.
    We have jurisdiction under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review for abuse of discretion the
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    denial of a motion to reopen, and de novo questions of law and constitutional
    claims. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 
    400 F.3d 785
    , 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny
    the petition for review.
    The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Horvath’s motion to
    reopen for failure to show ineffective assistance of counsel where her former
    counsel requested relief under sections 212(c) and (h), and where Horvath failed to
    show eligibility for such relief. 
    Id. at 793-94
     (a petitioner must show
    incompetence and establish prejudice to prevail on an ineffective assistance claim);
    Alvarez-Barajas v. Gonzales, 
    418 F.3d 1050
    , 1054-55 (9th Cir. 2005) (amendment
    of the definition of aggravated felony applies to convictions entered “before, on, or
    after” Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996’s
    enactment date).
    Horvath’s contention that her removal would violate international law is
    unavailing. Padilla-Padilla v. Gonzales, 
    463 F.3d 972
    , 979-80 (9th Cir. 2006).
    Horvath’s equal protection claim is foreclosed by Armendariz-Montoya v.
    Sonchik, 
    291 F.3d 1116
    , 1122-23 (9th Cir. 2002).
    Horvath’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                     11-70002
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-70002

Judges: Rawlinson, Murguia, Watford

Filed Date: 10/15/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024