22:I[98912,["/_next/static/chunks/0asocxi83kb~5.js","/_next/static/chunks/0n4z.7yu76je-.js","/_next/static/chunks/0eyt_ou8dj52g.js","/_next/static/chunks/01bcia3bjqt9z.js","/_next/static/chunks/15egrlmmf_yst.js"],"CaseDetailGate"] 23:T477,MEMORANDUM Ramon Jose Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review de novo questions of law, Aguiluz-Arellano v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d 980, 983 (9th Cir.2006), and we deny the petition for review. The BIA properly found Garcia removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(2)(B)(i) based on his guilty plea conviction under California Health and Safety Code § 11377(a) for possession of a controlled substance where the record of conviction establishes that the controlled substance underlying Garcia’s conviction was methamphetamine. See Ramirez-Villalpando v. Holder, 645 F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir.2011) (“We have permitted reliance on an abstract of judgment in combination with a charging document to establish that the defendant pled guilty to a generic crime under the modified categorical approach.”). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.24:T4a4,

MEMORANDUM

Ramon Jose Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review de novo questions of law, Aguiluz-Arellano v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d 980, 983 (9th Cir.2006), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA properly found Garcia removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(2)(B)(i) based on his guilty plea conviction under California Health and Safety Code § 11377(a) for possession of a controlled substance where the record of conviction establishes that the controlled substance underlying Garcia’s conviction was methamphetamine. See Ramirez-Villalpando v. Holder, 645 F.3d 1035, 1040 (9th Cir.2011) (“We have permitted reliance on an abstract of judgment in combination with a charging document to establish that the defendant pled guilty to a generic crime under the modified categorical approach.”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.