ROBERTO GERMAN TEPOZTECO- RIOS, AKA Roberto Rios, AKA Roberto Tepozteco v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERTO GERMAN TEPOZTECO-
RIOS, AKA Roberto Rios, AKA Roberto
Tepozteco,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-72198
Agency No. A205-712-052
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Roberto German Tepozteco-Rios, 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 (“IJ”) removal order. We have jurisdiction
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
DEC 20 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-72198
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law. Tawadrus v. Ashcroft,
364 F.3d 1099, 1102 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny the petition for review.
We reject Tepozteco-Rios’s contention that the agency denied his right to
counsel and violated due process, where he expressly opted to continue
unrepresented after the IJ asked if he would like more time to find an attorney. See
id. at 1103 (explaining requirements for waiver of right to counsel); Lata v. INS,
204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and substantial prejudice to
prevail on a due process claim).
The BIA did not err in rejecting Tepozteco-Rios’s unsupported contentions
that he was incapable of representing himself and that he fears returning to
Mexico. See Carrillo-Gonzalez v. INS, 353 F.3d 1077, 1079 (9th Cir. 2003)
(argument of counsel does not constitute evidence).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --