Bobadilla

Bobadilla v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Good Law
20 F. App'x 754
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 16, 2001No. 00-70418; I & NS No. A38-441-814 A-36-124-352California277 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Gracias Amador Bobadilla, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for re *755 view of a final decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) which dismissed her appeal of an Immigration Judge’s decision finding her deportable at time of entry, and ineligible for suspension of deportation. Pursuant to the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”), the transitional rules apply, Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997), and we therefore have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a), as amended by IIRIRA § 309(c), Avetova-Elisseva v. INS, 213 F.3d 1192 , 1195 n. 4 (9th Cir.2000). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Bobadilla’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim. Even assuming that Bobadilla complied with the procedural requirements set forth in Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988), her claim must fail because the record does not show that she suffered any actual prejudice due to ineffective representation. Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.2000); Mohsseni v. INS, 796 F.2d 249, 251 (9th Cir.1986).

The BIA did not err in holding that the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.