Julio

Julio v. Keisler

Good Law
243 F. App'x 345
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 27, 2007No. 04-73978California335 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Raul Carlos Julio and his wife Maria Alejandra Sanchez Lopez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order summarily affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying their applications for cancellation of removal. To the extent we have jurisdiction it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We dismiss in part, deny in part, and grant in part the petition for review, and remand.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s determination that Carlos Julio failed to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 890 (9th Cir.2003).

Carlos Julio’s and Sanchez Lopez’s contention that the streamlined BIA decision violates their constitutional rights is foreclosed by Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 848 (9th Cir.2003).

As to petitioner Sanchez Lopez only, an intervening change in the law requires us to remand on the issue of continuous physical presence. In Ibarra-Flores v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 614, 619 (9th Cir.2006), we held that voluntary departure under threat of deportation breaks the accrual of continuous physical…

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.