eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 2018-06

Enrique Villarreal-Martinez v. Jefferson Sessions ( 2018 )


Menu:
 
  •                               NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JUN 15 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ENRIQUE REYES VILLARREAL-                       No.    16-71239
MARTINEZ,
Agency No. A091-231-340
Petitioner,
v.                                             MEMORANDUM*
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 12, 2018**
Before:      RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Enrique Reyes Villarreal-Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from
an immigration judge’s decision denying withholding of removal and protection
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Villarreal-
Martinez’s request for oral argument is denied.
under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review de novo questions of law. Ahmed v. Holder,
    569 F.3d 1009
    , 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review.
Villarreal-Martinez does not raise, and therefore waives, any challenge to
the agency’s determination that he is ineligible for CAT relief, or to its fact-based
determination that his conviction for burglary of a habitation under Texas Penal
Code (“TPC”) § 30.02(c)(2) is a particularly serious crime, rendering him
ineligible for withholding of removal. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder,
    706 F.3d 1072
    , 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically argued in an opening brief
are waived).
Villarreal-Martinez’s general contention that only an aggravated felony can
be a particularly serious crime is foreclosed by Delgado v. Holder,
    648 F.3d 1095
    ,
1102 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc). To the extent he contends that the interpretation of
the particularly serious crime bar in Delgado v. Holder is overbroad, a three-judge
panel cannot overrule circuit precedent in the absence of an intervening decision
from a higher court. See Avagyan v. Holder,
    646 F.3d 672
    , 677 (9th Cir. 2011).
We need not reach Villarreal-Martinez’s contention that his conviction under
TPC § 30.02(c)(2) is not an aggravated felony. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft,
    371 F.3d 532
    , 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required to reach non-
dispositive issues).
2                                    16-71239
Villarreal-Martinez’s request to hold the case in abeyance pending the
Supreme Court’s decision reviewing Dimaya v. Lynch,
    803 F.3d 1110
     (9th Cir.
2015) is denied as moot, where a decision has since issued in Sessions v. Dimaya,
    138 S. Ct. 1204
     (2018).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3                                      16-71239