Estrada v. Holder ( 2009 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            DEC 09 2009
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    LIZARDI MAGALI ESTRADA,                          Nos. 04-76531
    05-72613
    Petitioner,
    Agency No. A077-974-853
    v.
    ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,            MEMORANDUM *
    Respondent.
    On Petitions for Review of Orders of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted November 17, 2009 **
    Before:        ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
    Lizardi Magali Estrada, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) orders dismissing her appeal
    from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for cancellation of
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
    oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    AP/Research
    removal and, upon reconsideration, again dismissing her appeal. As the BIA
    granted Estrada’s motion to reconsider, we dismiss the petition for review in No.
    04-76531. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1) (jurisdiction over final orders of removal).
    We have jurisdiction in petition No. 05-72613 under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
    de novo questions of law, Gonzalez-Gonzalez v. Ashcroft, 
    390 F.3d 649
    , 651 (9th
    Cir. 2004), and we deny the petition for review.
    The BIA properly concluded that Estrada is statutorily ineligible for
    cancellation of removal based on her conviction for a crime of domestic violence.
    See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1229b(b)(1)(C); 1227(a)(2)(E)(i); see also 
    Gonzalez-Gonzalez, 390 F.3d at 651-53
    . Estrada’s contention that she is eligible for cancellation
    because her conviction is not a crime involving moral turpitude is inapposite.
    Moreover, her contention that the petty offense exception applies in her case is
    unavailing. See Cisernos-Perez v. Gonzales, 
    465 F.3d 386
    , 390 (9th Cir. 2006)
    (petty offense exception does not apply to crimes of domestic violence).
    No. 04-76531: PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.
    No. 05-72613: PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    AP/Research                               2                                      04-76531
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-76531, 05-72613

Judges: Alarcón, Trott, Tashima

Filed Date: 12/9/2009

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024