Sandoval

Sandoval v. Gonzales

Good Law
128 F. App'x 3
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 11, 2005No. 03-74103California434 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Oscar Rudy Sandoval, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for cancellation of removal, asylum and withholding of removal. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review the IJ’s order as the final agency determination. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). Reviewing for substantial evidence, see Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000), we *5 dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary determination that Sandoval failed to satisfy the “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” requirement for cancellation of removal. Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003).

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Sandoval is not eligible for asylum. See Singh v. INS, 134 F.3d 962, 966 (9th Cir.1998). Sandoval’s testimony that the guerillas recruited him for economic gain and because of his leadership skills supports the agency’s conclusion that any…

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.