Santos Gonzalez Martinez v. Jefferson Sessions

702 F. App'x 652
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedNovember 20, 2017
Docket15-70881
StatusUnpublished

This text of 702 F. App'x 652 (Santos Gonzalez Martinez v. Jefferson Sessions) 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
Santos Gonzalez Martinez v. Jefferson Sessions, 702 F. App'x 652 (9th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Santos Gonzalez Martinez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) or(ier dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“U”) removal order. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s order dismissing Gonzalez Martinez’s appeal from an IJ’s removal order because he waived his right of appeal, and thereby failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. See Joo v. INS, 813 F.2d 211, 212 (9th Cir. 1987) (“A waiver of the right to appeal is a failure to exhaust administrative remedies.”).

To the extent Gonzalez Martinez contends the waiver was invalid because his former counsel failed to ask if he feared persecution or harm in Guatemala, we lack jurisdiction to consider this unexhausted contention. See Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 930 (9th Cir. 2004) (“A petitioner cannot satisfy the exhaustion requirement by making a general challenge to the IJ’s decision, but, rather, must specify which issues form the basis of the appeal.”); Brown v. Holder, 763 F.3d 1141, 1146 (9th Cir. 2014) (requiring petitioner to exhaust challenge to waiver of appeal).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Gonzalez Martinez’s request for prosecutorial discretion. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir. 2012) (order).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

**

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

Related

Luis Vilchiz-Soto v. Eric Holder, Jr.
688 F.3d 642 (Ninth Circuit, 2012)
Mark Brown v. Eric Holder, Jr.
763 F.3d 1141 (Ninth Circuit, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
702 F. App'x 652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/santos-gonzalez-martinez-v-jefferson-sessions-ca9-2017.