Santos

Santos v. Ashcroft

Good Law
103 F. App'x 232
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 28, 2004No. 03-70529California547 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Catalina Mendoza Santos (“Mendoza”), a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming without opinion the denial of her application for suspension of deportation. The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) had concluded, among other things, that Mendoza failed to establish “extreme hardship.” 8 U.S.C. § 1254 (a)(1) (repealed). Under the transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, Pub.L. No. 104-208, § 309 (c)(4)(E), 110 Stat. 3009 (1996), we lack jurisdiction to review for abuse of discretion that discretionary determination and dismiss that portion of her petition. See Sanchez-Cruz v. INS, 255 F.3d 775, 778-79 (9th Cir. 2001).

Mendoza also claims that the Spanish interpreter before the IJ was incompetent to interpret Mexteckel dialect. Constitutional due process claims, including the right to a competent translation, are reviewed de novo. See Ramirez-Alejandre v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 858, 869 (9th Cir. 2003). In order to establish a due process violation for faulty translation, Mendoza must show that the faulty translation prejudiced her hearing. Hartooni…

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.