Rosales

Rosales v. Ashcroft

Good Law
89 F. App'x 87
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 25, 2004No. 02-72315; Agency No. A77-074-841California223 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Roselia Rosales, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an Immigration Judge’s (“U”) decision denying her application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction over the IJ’s “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” determination because it involves an exercise of discretion. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003). Consequently, we pretermit review of petitioner’s challenge to the IJ’s continued physical presence finding because even were it successful, the hardship determination would still stand. See id.

Petitioner’s contention that the IJ violated due process rights by examining witnesses lacks merit, because an Immigration Judge has a duty to assist in developing the record. See Jacinto v. INS, 208 F.3d 725, 733 (9th Cir.2000). Moreover, Rosales failed to demonstrate prejudice. See Larita-Martinez v. INS, 220 F.3d 1092, 1095 (9th Cir.2000) (citation omitted).

Petitioner’s contention that the BIA’s summary affirmance procedure violates due process is foreclosed by our…

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.