Perez v. Gonzales

Ninth Circuit

Perez v. Gonzales

143 F. App'x 825

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedSeptember 15, 2005

DocketNo. 04-72095; Agency No. A79-602-732

StatusPublished

This text of 143 F. App'x 825 (Perez 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

Perez v. Gonzales, 143 F. App'x 825 (9th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

Alberto Leandro Maldonado Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that Maldonado Perez failed to establish good moral character for purposes of cancellation of removal. See Moran v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1089, 1091 (9th Cir.2005) (a moral character determination is reviewable only where it falls under one of the per se exclusion categories contained in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)); cf. Gomez-Lopez v. Ashcroft, 393 F.3d 882, 884 (9th Cir.2005).

We also lack jurisdiction to review the denial of voluntary departure. See Gomez-Lopez, 393 F.3d at 884.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit 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

MEMORANDUM

**

Alberto Leandro Maldonado Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of his application for cancellation of removal.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that Maldonado Perez failed to establish good moral character for purposes of cancellation of removal. See Moran v. Ashcroft, 395 F.3d 1089, 1091 (9th Cir.2005) (a moral character determination is reviewable only where it falls under one of the per se exclusion categories contained in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)); cf. Gomez-Lopez v. Ashcroft, 393 F.3d 882, 884 (9th Cir.2005).

We also lack jurisdiction to review the denial of voluntary departure. See Gomez-Lopez, 393 F.3d at 884.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 F. App'x 825, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perez-v-gonzales-ca9-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack