Javier Alfonso Luna Rivera v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JAVIER ALFONSO LUNA RIVERA,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 17-72523
Agency No. A205-173-654
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 9, 2023**
Pasadena, California
Before: SCHROEDER, TALLMAN, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Javier Alfonso Luna Rivera seeks review of an order of the Board of
Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the decision of an Immigration Judge (IJ)
FILED
FEB 13 2023
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 --

denying his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8
U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), and we deny the petition.
The BIA did not err in concluding that Luna Rivera’s conviction under
Section 245(a)(1) of the California Penal Code was a crime involving moral
turpitude (CIMT) under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I). See Safaryan v. Barr, 975
F.3d 976, 981 (9th Cir. 2020) (“[A] violation of § 245(a)(1) is categorically a
[CIMT].”).
Under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(C), an alien who is convicted of certain
enumerated offenses, including a CIMT, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I), is
“ineligible for cancellation of removal,” Barton v. Barr, 140 S. Ct. 1442, 1452
(2020), as we have confirmed on many occasions, see, e.g., Ballinas-Lucero v.
Garland, 44 F.4th 1169, 1173 (9th Cir. 2022); Diaz-Flores v. Garland, 993 F.3d
766, 773–74 (9th Cir. 2021).
Thus, because Luna Rivera’s conviction under Section 245(a)(1) was a
CIMT, he is ineligible for cancellation of removal.
PETITION DENIED.
2

-- 2 of 2 --