Eliseo Coronado-Galvan v. Merrick Garland ( 2023 )


Menu:
  •                               NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        APR 25 2023
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    ELISEO CORONADO-GALVAN,                         No.    20-73076
    Petitioner,                     Agency No. A209-809-131
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
    General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted April 17, 2023**
    Before:      CLIFTON, R. NELSON, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
    Eliseo Coronado-Galvan, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
    review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
    immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of
    removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
    *
    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).
    jurisdiction under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review de novo claims of due process
    violations in immigration proceedings. Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 
    371 F.3d 532
    , 535
    (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review.
    Coronado-Galvan’s claim the agency violated due process by denying him
    the opportunity to testify fails for lack of prejudice. See Padilla-Martinez v.
    Holder, 
    770 F.3d 825
    , 830 (9th Cir. 2014) (“To prevail on a due-process claim, a
    petitioner must demonstrate both a violation of rights and prejudice.”).
    Because Coronado-Galvan does not challenge the agency’s denial of
    asylum, withholding of removal, or CAT protection, we do not consider these
    issues. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 
    706 F.3d 1072
    , 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013).
    The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                       20-73076
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20-73076

Filed Date: 4/25/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/25/2023