Romero-Perez v. Ashcroft

90 F. App'x 261
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided March 16, 2004·No. No. 02-71767; Agency No. A74-428-349·Published

Opinion

MEMORANDUM**

Emilio Romero-Perez (“Romero-Perez”), a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”). The Board order dismissed Romero-Perez’s appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of Romero-Perez’s application for cancellation of removal under Section 240A(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”).

We lack jurisdiction to review the Board’s determination that Romero-Perez failed to establish the requisite hardship, a discretionary determination ineligible for appellate review under INA section 242(a)(2)(B)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i). See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 827 F.3d 887, 888 (9th Cir.2003)(charaeterizing the “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” determination as “a subjective, discretionary judgment that has been carved out of [the court’s] appellate jurisdiction”).

Additionally, Romero-Perez’s due process claims fail, since he did not properly present them to the Board. “[C]orrectable procedural errors” — even those that implicate due process concerns—must be presented to the Board before being raised in this court. Liu v. Waters, 55 F.3d 421, 425-26 (9th Cir.1995).

The petition is DENIED.

Footnotes

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

Romero-Perez v. Ashcroft, 90 F. App'x 261 (9th Cir. 2004).

90 F. App'x 261 (Romero-Perez v. Ashcroft) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related