Parra-Morales

Parra-Morales v. Ashcroft

Good Law

76 F. App'x 215

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 30, 2003Nos. 01-56894, 02-56164; D.C. Nos. CV-01-00600-BTM, CV-02-00040-BTMCalifornia160 words

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Taniguchi v. Schultz 1 holds that Immigration and Nationality Act § 212(h) ( 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (h)) does not violate equal protection by distinguishing between lawful and non-lawful permanent residents convicted of aggravated felonies. Taniguchi thus precludes the habeas relief sought by Parra-Morales in his first writ.

The appeal of the stay is moot, and we need not decide it, because (1) Parra-Morales was nevertheless eventually released; (2) the basis for issuing the writ was vitiated by Taniguchi-, and (3) our decision in *216 Kim v. Ziglar, 2 providing for release, was reversed by the Supreme Court. See Demore v. Kim. 3

REVERSED

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

. 303 F.3d 950 , 957-58 (9th Cir.2002).

. 276 F.3d 523 (9th Cir.2002).

. — U.S. —, 123 S.Ct. 1708 , 155 L.Ed.2d 724 (2003).