Ledezma-Rivas v. Holder

395 F. App'x 363
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 7, 2010
Docket07-73282
StatusUnpublished

This text of 395 F. App'x 363 (Ledezma-Rivas 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.

Bluebook
Ledezma-Rivas v. Holder, 395 F. App'x 363 (9th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Patricia Ledezma-Rivas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review questions of law de novo, Tapia v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 997, 999 (9th Cir.2005), and we deny the petition for review.

The agency properly determined that Ledezma-Rivas was ineligible for cancellation of removal because she failed to meet the seven-year continuous physical presence requirement. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(2) (requiring seven years of continuous presence after having been “admitted in any status”); see also 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13)(A) (defining “admitted” as “the lawful entry of an alien into the United States after inspection and authorization by an immigration officer.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

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

Bluebook (online)
395 F. App'x 363, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ledezma-rivas-v-holder-ca9-2010.