Romero-Acero

Romero-Acero v. Gonzales

Good Law
227 F. App'x 631
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 9, 2007No. 06-75321California323 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

The motion to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The Clerk shall amend the docket to reflect this status.

The regulations provide that, absent certain exceptional circumstances, a motion to reopen “must be filed no later than 90 days after the date on which the final administrative decision was rendered in the proceeding sought to be' reopened.” See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2 (c)(2). Ineffective assistance of counsel can constitute “exceptional circumstances” under 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(e)(1); however, a motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel must generally meet the procedural requirements set forth in Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988). The BIA correctly found that petitioner failed to establish that he complied with these procedural requirements. See Reyes v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 592, 596-99 (9th Cir.2004). Although petitioner states that he submitted a sworn affidavit regarding his former attorney, the BIA’s order states that petitioner did not submit any documents in support of his motion to reopen. Moreover, the certified administrative record does not contain a sworn affidavit, and petitioner did not submit a copy of the affidavit, or…

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.