Juan M. Casas v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JUAN M. CASAS,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 15-71365
Agency No. A095-613-828
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 13, 2018**
Before: LEAVY, M. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Juan M. Casas, 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”) decision ordering removal. Our jurisdiction is governed
by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the agency’s denial of a
* 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
MAR 20 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 15-71365
motion to continue, and review de novo questions of law. Tawadrus v. Ashcroft,
364 F.3d 1099, 1102-03 (9th Cir. 2004). We deny in part and dismiss in part the
petition for review.
Contrary to Casas’ contention, California Health and Safety Code § 11378 is
divisible as to the substance involved, see United States v. Vega Ortiz, 822 F.3d
1031, 1035 (9th Cir. 2016), and Casas concedes that the record of conviction
shows the conviction involved methamphetamine.
To the extent Casas’ contends the agency denied his right to counsel and
erred in deeming his right to counsel waived, the record does not support these
contentions, where he expressly asked to proceed pro se, and he twice declined the
IJ’s offer to order Casas’ attorney to appear in court. See Tawadrus, 364 F.3d at
1103.
We lack jurisdiction to consider Casas’ unexhausted contention regarding
the denial of his continuance request. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080
(9th Cir. 2010).
Casas’ renewed motion for a stay of removal (Docket Entry No. 21) is denied
as moot.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --