Tellez

Tellez v. Mukasey

Good Law
261 F. App'x 941
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 28, 2007No. 07-70508California251 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Ezequiel Munoz Tellez, his wife Felipa Mayo Cortes, and their son Alexis Em *942 manuel Munoz Mayo seek review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming an immigration judge’s order denying the parents’ applications for cancellation of removal. To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review de novo claims of constitutional violations in immigration proceedings, see Ram v. INS, 243 F.3d 510, 516 (9th Cir.2001), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s discretionary determination that petitioners failed. to show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a qualifying relative. See Romero-Torres v. Ashcroft, 327 F.3d 887, 892 (9th Cir.2003). We do not consider petitioners’ contentions regarding physical presence and moral character, because petitioners’ failure to establish hardship is dispositive.

We are not persuaded that the qualifying relative requirement for cancellation of removal violates equal protection. See Ram, 243 F.3d at 517 (“ ‘[Ljine-drawing’ decisions made by Congress or the President in the context of immigration and…

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.