Palacios

Palacios v. Mukasey

Good Law
278 F. App'x 764
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 15, 2008No. 07-71805California278 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

This is a petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing petitioners’ appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of cancellation of removal.

A review of the administrative record demonstrates that there is substantial evidence to support the BIA’s decision that petitioners failed to establish continuous physical presence in the United States for a period of not less than ten years as required for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(A); Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft, 381 F.3d 847, 850-51 (9th Cir.2004).

A further review of the record reflects that the constitutional arguments raised by the petitioners in their opening brief are not colorable. Specifically, this court has previously held that the physical presence requirement does not violate due process. See Padilla-Padilla v. Gonzales, 463 F.3d 972, 979 (9th Cir.2006).

In addition, petitioners are unable to demonstrate that the immigration judge’s *765 denial of their request for a continuance violated due process, because the denial did not prejudice petitioners’ cancellation application. See Sarvia-Quintanilla v. INS, 767 F.2d 1387, 1394-95 (9th…

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.