Gonzalo-Garzon

Gonzalo-Garzon v. Ashcroft

Good Law
58 F. App'x 348
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 13, 2003No. 01-56907; D.C. No. CV-01-01129-JNKCalifornia303 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Yanez Gonzalo-Garzon, a native and citizen of Colombia, appeals pro se the district court’s order denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 . We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . After de novo review, Murphy v. Hood, 276 F.3d 475, 477 (9th Cir.2001), we affirm.

When Gonzalo-Garzon pled guilty to his firearms offense in 1994, a deportee could seek relief under section 212(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act only if the ground for deportation had an analogous ground for exclusion listed in section *349 212(a). See Cabasug v. INS, 847 F.2d 1321, 1323 (9th Cir.1988). Firearms convictions under section 241(a)(2)(C) had no analogue in section 212(a). Cf Cabasug, 847 F.2d at 1323 (“[a]liens convicted of weapons offenses are not among [the] ex-cludable classes” listed in section 212(a)). Therefore, Gonzalo-Garzon was statutorily ineligible for section 212(c) relief at the time of his firearms conviction and the district court properly denied his habeas petition. See Cabasug, 847 F.2d at 1322-24 ; c f. INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289, 326 , 121 S.Ct. 2271 , 150 L.Ed.2d 347 (2001) (“ § 212(c) relief remains…

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.