Ertur

Ertur v. Ashcroft

Good Law
114 F. App'x 897
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 10, 2004No. 02-73047; Agency No. A77-538-796California410 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Bulent Ertur, a native of Turkey and a citizen of Germany, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his untimely appeal of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision, and the BIA’s order denying his motion to reconsider. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We dismiss the petition for review in part, and deny it in part.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s February 5, 2002 order of dismissal because Ertur’s petition for review, which was filed on September 20, 2002, is not timely as to that order. See Narayan v. INS, 105 F.3d 1335, 1335 (9th Cir.1997) (order) (a petition for review of a final order of removal entered after October 30, 1996, must be filed within 30 days of the date of the order).

We also lack jurisdiction to consider Ertur’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim because he failed to exhaust administrative remedies. See Ontiveros-Lopez v. INS, 213 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2000) (“We ... require an alien who argues ineffective assistance of counsel to exhaust his administrative remedies by first presenting the issue to the BIA.”).

The BIA did not abuse its…

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.