Hector Aguiluz-Pineda v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Hector Aguiluz-Pineda petitions for review of a BIA decision denying him cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (b)(3). Citing Matter of Burbano, 20 I. & N. Dec. 872 (BIA 1994), the BIA adopted and affirmed the IJ’s decision, which concluded that Aguiluz-Pineda was statutorily barred from cancellation of removal for having been convicted of a particularly serious crime. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231 (b)(3)(B)(ii). Because the IJ failed to analyze this application for relief under the applicable Matter of Y-L- factors, we grant the petition for review and remand for application of these factors. See 23 I. & N. Dec. 270, 276-77 (Att’y Gen.2002).
We have jurisdiction over legal questions. 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(D). In addition, 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (d)(i )’s exhaustion requirement is not a bar to our review of the issue presented here, as the IJ explicitly conducted the particularly serious crime determination and the BIA adopted and affirmed her decision under Matter ofBur-bano. See Abebe v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 1037, 1040-41 (9th Cir.2005) (en banc). We review the IJ’s decision for an abuse of discretion. Arbid v. Holder, 700 F.3d 379, 383 (9th Cir.2012) (per curiam).