Baltazar-Huerta

Baltazar-Huerta v. Gonzales

Good Law
158 F. App'x 800
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 12, 2005No. 03-72309; Agency Nos. A77-824-303, A77-824-304California299 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

J. Guadalupe Baltazar-Huerta and Maria Melouiades Andres-Espinal, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration *801 Appeals (“BIA”) which summarily affirmed an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of their applications for cancellation of removal, asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny in part, and dismiss in part the petition for review.

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over petitioners’ withholding of removal claim. Reviewing for substantial evidence, Kaur v. Ashcroft, 379 F.3d 876, 884 (2004), we deny the claim because substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that petitioners did not demonstrate they are more likely than not to be persecuted in Mexico within the meaning of withholding of removal. See Ramadan v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 1218, 1222-23 (9th Cir.2005).

We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s determination that the petitioners are statutorily ineligible for asylum based on the one-year time bar. See id. at 1221-22 .

We decline to consider petitioners’ cancellation of removal claim because they raised it for the first time in their…

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.