JUAN CARLOS HERRERA- MAGALLANES, AKA Juan Herrera v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN CARLOS HERRERA-
MAGALLANES, AKA Juan Herrera,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72053
Agency No. A099-835-804
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 21, 2015**
Before: CANBY, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Juan Carlos Herrera-Magallanes, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for
cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review
FILED
AUG 04 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

de novo questions of law. Espino-Castillo v. Holder, 770 F.3d 861, 863 (9th Cir.
2014). We deny the petition for review.
Herrera-Magallanes contends that his conviction for forgery under Arizona
Revised Statutes § 13-2002 is divisible and is not categorically a crime involving
moral turpitude. Herrera-Magallanes’ contention is foreclosed by this court’s
holding in Espino-Castillo v. Holder, where this court concluded § 13-2002
“requires intent to defraud” and was not divisible because it is a “statute that
proscribes only morally turpitudinous conduct.” Id. at 864-65. Accordingly, the
BIA correctly determined that a conviction for forgery under § 13-2002 is
categorically a crime involving moral turpitude that renders Herrera-Magallanes
statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(f)(3),
1229b(b)(1)(B).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
10-72053 2

-- 2 of 2 --