Soto

MEMORANDUM *

Gamaliel Plasencia Soto (Soto) petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeal’s (BIA’s) affirmance of an immigration judge’s (IJ’s) order of removal No. (05-70977) and its denial of his motion to reopen (05-73313). We have limited jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a), and we dismiss in part and deny in part.

1. Soto argues that the BIA erred when it affirmed the IJ’s order of removal because he was allegedly “admitted” as a beneficiary of the Family Unity Program, see 8 C.F.R. § 236.12 , and was therefore (1) not inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(6)(A)®, INA § 212(a)(6)(A)®, as charged in the Notice to Appear, and (2) eligible for cancellation for certain lawful permanent residents (LPRs) under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a). Because Soto failed to exhaust his administrative remedies as to these claims, we have no jurisdiction to review them. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (d)(1).

2. Soto next argues that the BIA erred in affirming the IJ’s determination that his convictions under California Penal Code sections 273.5(a) and 273a(b) were crimes involving moral turpitude that rendered him inadmissible and therefore ineligible for adjustment of status. See 8 U.S.C. §§…