Cesar Omar Chavez-Juarez v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CESAR OMAR CHAVEZ-JUAREZ,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 14-71635
Agency No. A079-539-229
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 7, 2018**
San Francisco, California
Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and HAWKINS and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Cesar Omar Chavez-Juarez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision finding him removable and denying his motion to
FILED
AUG 15 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* 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).

-- 1 of 2 --

suppress evidence and terminate proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review de novo the denial of a motion to suppress, and claims of
constitutional violations. Martinez-Medina v. Holder, 673 F.3d 1029, 1033 (9th
Cir. 2011) (citations omitted). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not err in denying Chavez-Juarez’s motion to suppress
evidence and terminate proceedings. Chavez-Juarez failed to demonstrate the
evidence obtained from the search of his home, his identity, was obtained as the
result of an egregious constitutional violation. See Lopez-Rodriguez v. Mukasey,
536 F.3d 1012, 1016–18 (9th Cir. 2008) (reasoning that the Fourth Amendment
exclusionary rule, which does not generally apply in deportation proceedings,
requires administrative tribunals to exclude evidence that was obtained by a
deliberate violation of the Fourth Amendment or by conduct a reasonable officer
should have known is in violation of the Constitution) (citing Gonzalez-Rivera v.
I.N.S., 22 F.3d 1441, 1449 (9th Cir. 1994)). Rather, the record supports the
agency’s determination that Chavez-Juarez consented to the immigration officers’
search of his home, and consented to speak with the officers.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --