Juan Martinez-Bruno v. Eric Holder, Jr.
This text of 445 F. App'x 14 (Juan Martinez-Bruno v. Eric Holder, Jr.) 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 **
Juan Martinez-Bruno, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dis *15 missing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical presence determination, Gutierrez v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Martinez-Bruno, did not meet the continuous physical presence requirement where he testified that he accepted voluntary departure instead of appearing before an IJ during the relevant statutory time period. See id. at 1117-18 (petitioner’s testimony that he had the opportunity to appear before an IJ but chose to depart instead is sufficient to establish presence-breaking voluntary departure).
We lack jurisdiction to review Martinez-Bruno’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim because he failed to exhaust that issue before the agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).
Martinez-Bruno’s remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid *15 ed 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
445 F. App'x 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/juan-martinez-bruno-v-eric-holder-jr-ca9-2011.