Perez

Perez v. Ashcroft

Good Law
103 F. App'x 140
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 24, 2004No. 02-71587California280 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Anabertha Perez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of her motion to reopen. Because the transitional rules apply, see Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.1997), we have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Perez’s contentions regarding the merits *141 of the underlying order of deportation, as well as the IJ’s denial of her request to continue her suspension of deportation hearing, because the petition for review is not timely as to that order. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1258 (9th Cir.1996).

We review BIA’s denial of Perez’s motion to reopen for an abuse of discretion. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Perez’s motion based on ineffective assistance of counsel, because Perez failed to show how counsel’s performance, even if deficient, prejudiced her. See id. at 899-900 (“Prejudice results when the performance of counsel was so inadequate that it…

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.