Carrillo-Maldonado

Carrillo-Maldonado v. Ashcroft

Good Law
59 F. App'x 185
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 5, 2003Nos. 02-70539, INS A75-301509, INS A75-301-510California730 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Juan Carrillo-Maldonado and Marina Hernandez-Vega, natives and citizens of Mexico, appeal the BIA’s final order of removal. The BIA found that because the charging document was not filed until after April 1, 1997, they were no longer statutorily eligible for the pre-Ulegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (“IIRIRA”) remedy of suspension of deportation but instead could only seek cancellation of removal under IIRIRA. Petitioners argue that because they filed their asylum application before April 1, 1997, they had settled expectations of being placed in deportation proceedings rather than removal proceedings. Mr. Carrillo-Maldonado also challenges the denial of voluntary departure (which was based on *187 the IJ’s and BIA’s finding of dishonest testimony). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b). We deny the petition.

This case is not distinguishable from Jimenez-Angeles v. Ashcroft, 291 F.3d 594 (9th Cir.2002). Settled expectations that an INS action will commence upon the denial of an asylum application do not equate to settled expectations as to when it will commence. The BIA correctly held that the INS action commenced upon the filing of…

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.