Partida-Serrano v. Gonzales

Ninth Circuit

Partida-Serrano v. Gonzales

131 F. App'x 112

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 13, 2005

DocketNo. 04-70618; Agency No. A38-084-568

StatusPublished

This text of 131 F. App'x 112 (Partida-Serrano v. Gonzales) 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

Partida-Serrano v. Gonzales, 131 F. App'x 112 (9th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Petitioner Partida faces removal based upon a conviction for an aggravated felony. In his petition for review, petitioner does not challenge the classification of his prior [113]*113conviction as an “aggravated felony” under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(A), and we agree that it so qualifies. That being the case, we lack jurisdiction to review petitioner’s order of removal. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C). We therefore treat his petition as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, and transfer it to the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. See Cazarez-Gutierrez v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d 905, 919 (9th Cir.2004) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1631). Upon transfer, Partida may make any necessary amendments to perfect the form of the petition. See Salvatierra-Cermeno v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1119, slip op. at 4190 (9th Cir.2005).

PETITION TRANSFERRED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

Petitioner Partida faces removal based upon a conviction for an aggravated felony. In his petition for review, petitioner does not challenge the classification of his prior [113]*113conviction as an “aggravated felony” under the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(A), and we agree that it so qualifies. That being the case, we lack jurisdiction to review petitioner’s order of removal. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C). We therefore treat his petition as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, and transfer it to the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. See Cazarez-Gutierrez v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d 905, 919 (9th Cir.2004) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 1631). Upon transfer, Partida may make any necessary amendments to perfect the form of the petition. See Salvatierra-Cermeno v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1119, slip op. at 4190 (9th Cir.2005).

PETITION TRANSFERRED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 F. App'x 112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/partida-serrano-v-gonzales-ca9-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack