Carlos Aldana-Hernandez v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CARLOS ALDANA-HERNANDEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-74103
Agency No. A057-437-139
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 16, 2013**
Before: CANBY, IKUTA, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Carlos Aldana-Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under
FILED
APR 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

09-74103 2
8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing de novo questions of law, Retuta v. Holder, 591 F.3d
1181, 1184 (9th Cir. 2010), we deny the petition for review.
The BIA correctly concluded that Aldana-Hernandez’s conviction under
California Health & Safety Code § 11352(a) renders him removable under
8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B) because a modified-categorical analysis of the criminal
complaint, read in conjunction with the minute order, establishes that his offense
relates to cocaine. See Mielewczyk v. Holder, 575 F.3d 992, 998 (9th Cir. 2009)
(“[S]ection 11352(a) addresses only conduct involving controlled substances.”);
21 C.F.R. § 1308.12(b)(4) (listing cocaine as a Schedule II federally controlled
substance); see also United States v. Leal-Vega, 680 F.3d 1160, 1168-69 (9th Cir.
2012) (holding that a criminal complaint specifying a controlled substance, read
together with other judicially noticeable documents confirming a plea to the
complaint, may be sufficient under the modified-categorical analysis to establish a
conviction involving the specified substance, as long as the record of conviction
contains no ambiguity concerning the substance involved).
Aldana-Hernandez’s citations to United States v. Vidal, 504 F.3d 1072
(9th Cir. 2007) (en banc), and Ruiz-Vidal v. Gonzales, 473 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir.
2007), do not compel a different result, where the record of conviction in each of

-- 2 of 3 --

09-74103 3
those cases contained ambiguities that prevented the court from linking the plea to
the factual basis stated in the criminal complaint.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --