Hernandez
Hernandez v. Gonzales
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Carlos Cisneros Hernandez and Rocio Cisneros, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition for review of the Board of Immi *569 gration Appeals’ order dismissing their appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying their applications for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence the agency’s finding that the petitioners failed to establish the requisite continuous physical presence in the United States. Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 847, 851 (9th Cir.2004). We review de novo constitutional challenges. Torres-Aguilar v. INS, 246 F.3d 1267, 1271 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Carlos failed to establish ten years of continuous physical presence because there are inconsistencies within his own testimony and between the documentary evidence regarding where he first lived upon entering the United States. Cf. Lopez-Alvarado, 381 F.3d at 851-52 (continuous physical presence established where corroborating evidence was particularly strong and nothing in the record contradicted the alien’s claim).