The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
19-71986•United States v. 2020-10-29 | 19-71986 | FRANCISCO RODRIGUEZ-ALVA V. WILLIAM BARR | nonprecedential | memorandum disposition |
19-71986Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOct 29, 2020
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANCISCO EDENILSON RODRIGUEZ-
ALVA,
Petitioner,
v.
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 19-71986
Agency No. A201-289-716
MEMORANDUM
*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 26, 2020
**
Before: McKEOWN, RAWLINSON, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Francisco Edenilson Rodriguez-Alva, a native and citizen of Guatemala,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his request for voluntary
departure. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo
*
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
OCT 29 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 19-71986
questions of law. Corro-Barragan v. Holder, 718 F.3d 1174, 1177 (9th Cir. 2013).
We deny the petition for review.
In light of the court’s December 17, 2019, order dismissing the petition for
review as to Rodriguez-Alva’s cancellation of removal claim, we do not address
the cancellation of removal contentions raised in Rodriguez-Alva’s opening brief.
See Docket Entry No. 9 (dismissing petition for review as to cancellation of
removal claim).
Rodriguez-Alva’s contention that the agency violated his due process rights
by improperly denying voluntary departure fails, where Rodriguez-Alva did not
meet his burden to establish his eligibility. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246
(9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to prevail on a due process claim).
On December 17, 2019, the court granted a stay of removal. The stay of
removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.