Rigoberto Villasenor-Sanchez v. Eric H. Holder Jr. , 466 F. App'x 558 ( 2012 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 06 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RIGOBERTO VILLASENOR- No. 08-70957
SANCHEZ, a.k.a. Rigoberto Villasenor
Sanchez, Agency No. A044-553-667
Petitioner,
MEMORANDUM *
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 19, 2011 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Rigoberto Villasenor-Sanchez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
*
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).
We review de novo questions of law, Salviejo-Fernandez v. Gonzales, 455 F.3d
1063, 1066 (9th Cir. 2006), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA correctly determined that Villasenor-Sanchez is ineligible for
cancellation of removal because his criminal convictions in 1999 interrupted the
accrual of the requisite seven years of continuous residence in the United States.
See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(a)(2), (d)(1)(B).
Contrary to Villasenor-Sanchez’s contention, his 1999 conviction for petty
theft, in violation of California Penal Code § 488, is a crime involving moral
turpitude. See Castillo-Cruz v. Holder, 581 F.3d 1154, 1160 (9th Cir. 2009) (per
curiam) (“Under California law, a conviction for grand theft or petty theft under
Cal. Penal Code § 484 requires, in common with other crimes of moral turpitude,
‘the specific intent to deprive the victim of his property permanently.’”); Flores
Juarez v. Mukasey, 530 F.3d 1020, 1022 (9th Cir. 2008). Because he has been
convicted of two crimes involving moral turpitude, he is unable to avail himself of
the petty offense exception under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(ii)(II).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 08-70957