Pereyra
Pereyra v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Magdalena Escobar Pereyra appeals pro se 1 from the district court’s judgment denying her 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging the Immigration Judge’s order finding her removable because of her conviction of a controlled substance offense and an aggravated felony. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . Flores-Miramontes v. INS, 212 F.3d 1133, 1137-38 (9th Cir.2000). Reviewing de novo, Murphy v. Hood, 276 F.3d 475, 477 (9th Cir.2001), we affirm.
Pereyra contends that she is entitled to apply for a 212(c) waiver because she pled guilty based on her criminal attorney’s advice about the availability of 212(c) relief. We disagree.
In 1996 Congress passed the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-132, Stat. 1214 (1996) (“AEDPA”). Section 440(d) of AEDPA amended section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate discretionary relief for aliens convicted of most drug-related crimes, and took effect on April 24, 1996.
Under the law applicable to Pereyra at the time she entered her guilty plea on May 7, 1996, her conviction for sale of a controlled substance precluded her eligibility for 212(c) relief.…