Ramirez-Rodriguez v. Holder
This text of 367 F. App'x 850 (Ramirez-Rodriguez 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.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Luis Ramirez-Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Morales-Alegna v. Gonzales, 449 F.3d 1051, 1053 (9th Cir.2006), and due process claims, Sanchez-Cruz v. INS, 255 F.3d 775, 779 (9th Cir.2001). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Ramirez-Rodriguez’s contention that a conviction under Cal.Penal Code § 422 does not categorically constitute a crime of violence is foreclosed by Rosales-Rosales v. Ashcroft, 347 F.3d 714, 717 (9th Cir.2003).
Ramirez-Rodriguez’s contention that the IJ violated his due process rights by refusing to continue his immigration proceedings fails because he did not establish good cause for a continuance. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29; Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000) (requiring error for a due process violation).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Ramirez-Rodriguez’s remaining contentions because he failed to exhaust them before the agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
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
367 F. App'x 850, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ramirez-rodriguez-v-holder-ca9-2010.