Noe Ramirez v. Eric H. Holder Jr.

Good Law
520 F. App'x 526
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 9, 201308-74142California564 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Noe Ramirez (“Ramirez”) petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(D), and we deny the petition.

1. Although Ramirez was subject to removal based on his conviction of an aggravated felony, namely, carjacking in violation of California Penal Code § 215, we nevertheless have jurisdiction to review the final removal order because Ramirez’s petition involves the application of law to undisputed facts. Fernandez-Ruiz v. Gonzales, 410 F.3d 585, 587 (9th Cir.2005) (stating that we have jurisdiction to review constitutional claims and questions of law presented in petitions for review of final removal orders), as adopted by 466 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2006) (en banc); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 648 (9th Cir.2007) (holding that “questions of law” include questions involving the application of law to undisputed facts, sometimes referred to as mixed questions of fact and law). Therefore, we address the merits of Ramirez’s petition.

2. Ramirez contends that the state court lacked…

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.