Philippe-Auguste v. Keisler
This text of 243 F. App'x 339 (Philippe-Auguste v. Keisler) 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
Marie-Gabrielle Jocelyn Philippe-Auguste, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s (“LJ”) order denying her application for voluntary departure. We deny the petition for review.
The record supports the BIA’s determination that Philippe-Auguste failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that [340]*340she was eligible for voluntary departure. See 8 C.F.R. § 1240.26(c)(l)(iv), (2).
We review de novo claims of constitutional violations in immigration proceedings. See Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001). Philippe-Auguste’s contention that she was denied due process because the BIA relied on a ground different from that relied upon by the IJ to deny her application for voluntary departure is unavailing. See Lin v. Gonzales, 472 F.3d 1131, 1136, n. 1 (9th Cir.2007). Moreover, Philippe-Auguste has not demonstrated prejudice. See Colmenar v. INS, 210 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring prejudice to prevail on a due process challenge).
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
243 F. App'x 339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philippe-auguste-v-keisler-ca9-2007.