Allen v. Holder
This text of 327 F. App'x 39 (Allen v. Holder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Orlando Alexander Allen, native and citizen of Jamaica, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Zheng v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1193 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s decision that Allen failed to establish eligibility for CAT. See Zheng, 332 F.3d at 1194.
We lack jurisdiction to review Allen’s due process claims regarding his hearing because he failed to raise them before the agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
327 F. App'x 39, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-holder-ca9-2009.