DocketNumber: 09-71090
Citation Numbers: 540 F. App'x 643
Judges: Bybee, Schroeder, Timlin
Filed Date: 9/24/2013
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 8/7/2023
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 24 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JORGE URBANO-BARRIGA, AKA No. 09-71090 Jorge Barriga, AKA Jorge Urbano, Agency No. A073-847-699 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted September 10, 2013** San Francisco, California Before: SCHROEDER and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and TIMLIN, Senior District Judge.*** * 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). *** The Honorable Robert J. Timlin, Senior United States District Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation. Petitioner Jorge Urbano-Barriga, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ dismissal of his appeal of an Immigration Judge’s decision finding him removable due to a conviction that qualified as an aggravated felony theft offense under8 U.S.C. § 1101
(a)(43)(G). His conviction was for violation of California Penal Code § 496d(a). This court in Alvarez-Reynaga v. Holder,596 F.3d 534
, 536–37 (9th Cir. 2010), held that California Penal Code § 496d(a) categorically qualifies as an aggravated felony. Relying on our previous decision in Verdugo-Gonzalez v. Holder,581 F.3d 1059
, 1061–62 (9th Cir. 2009), we observed that California’s general receipt of stolen property offense matched the generic theft offense, and concluded that California Penal Code § 496d(a) was an aggravated felony for the same reason. Alvarez-Reynaga,596 F.3d at
536–37. Our decision in Alvarez- Reynaga is controlling. The petition is DENIED. 2