Vasquez-Zarco v. Holder
This text of 373 F. App'x 812 (Vasquez-Zarco 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 **
Angelica Ramos Carmona, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s continuous physical presence determination, Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 614, 618 (9th Cir.2006), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Carmona did not meet the continuous physical presence requirement where she testified, in accordance with her cancellation application, that she departed the United States for Mexico in September of 1991 for seven months, and in April of 1998 for seventeen months. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(d)(2) (departure in excess of 90 days or for any periods in the aggregate exceeding 180 days breaks continuous physical presence).
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
373 F. App'x 812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vasquez-zarco-v-holder-ca9-2010.