Hernandez

Hernandez v. Gonzales

Good Law
138 F. App'x 984
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 13, 2005No. 04-70215California242 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Miguel Miranda Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for cancellation of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s denial of Hernandez’s cancellation of removal application because relief was denied in part due to Hernandez’s failure to establish the necessary exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(B); Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003). Because his failure to demonstrate the requisite hardship is dispositive, we do not reach whether Hernandez established ten years of continuous physical presence. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1); Romero-Torres, 327 F.3d at 889 .

Furthermore, we lack jurisdiction to consider Hernandez’s contention that the IJ violated his due process rights by not allowing Dr. Fries to testify because he failed to exhaust this argument before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir.2004) (explaining that exhaustion is mandatory and jurisdictional when due process…

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.