Bernartita Moses v. Jefferson Sessions
This text of Bernartita Moses v. Jefferson Sessions (Bernartita Moses v. Jefferson Sessions) 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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 13 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
BERNARTITA MOSES, AKA Bernartita No. 15-72051 Mariano Moses, Agency No. A206-352-760 Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 10, 2018**
Before: CANBY, W. FLETCHER, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Bernartita Moses, a native and citizen of the Federated States of Micronesia,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision ordering her removed. Our
* 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 is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part
the petition for review.
Moses has not raised, and therefore she has waived, any challenge to the
agency’s determination that her conviction under Hawaii Penal Code §§ 708-
830(2), 708-831(1)(b) is a crime involving moral turpitude. See Corro-Barragan v.
Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 n.5 (9th Cir. 2013) (failure to contest issue in opening
brief resulted in waiver). Moses also waived any challenge to removability,
because she did not raise this contention in her opening brief. See id.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Moses’s unexhausted challenges to the
validity of her criminal conviction. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th
Cir. 2010) (the court lacks jurisdiction to consider legal claims not presented in an
alien’s administrative proceedings before the agency).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
2 15-72051
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bernartita Moses v. Jefferson Sessions, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bernartita-moses-v-jefferson-sessions-ca9-2018.