From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frances v. Sessions

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Feb 22, 2017
No. 15-73235 (9th Cir. Feb. 22, 2017)

Opinion

No. 15-73235

02-22-2017

GUILLERMO ANDRADE FRANCES, AKA Guillermo Andrade, Petitioner, v. JEFF B. SESSIONS, Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Agency No. A206-406-329 MEMORANDUM On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Before: GOODWIN, FARRIS, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Guillermo Andrade Frances, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's ("IJ") final order of removal. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a continuance and review de novo claims of due process violations. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion or violate due process in not granting Andrade Frances a continuance to obtain counsel, where after granting a two week continuance, the IJ asked Andrade Frances if he wished to contact additional attorneys or to represent himself, and Andrade Frances stated he wished to represent himself and did not request a continuance. See Biwot v. Gonzales, 403 F.3d 1094, 1098-99 (9th Cir. 2005) (IJ must provide alien with reasonable time to locate counsel, but absent a showing of clear abuse, the court will typically not disturb the decision not to continue a hearing); Montes-Lopez v. Holder, 694 F.3d 1085, 1088-89, 1094 (9th Cir. 2012) (denial of counsel can violate the Fifth Amendment, but an IJ need not continue hearings indefinitely for an alien to find counsel).

We lack jurisdiction to consider Andrade Frances' unexhausted contentions regarding knowing and voluntary waiver of his right to counsel and the IJ's explanation of procedures. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review the merits of a legal claim not presented in administrative proceedings below).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.


Summaries of

Frances v. Sessions

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Feb 22, 2017
No. 15-73235 (9th Cir. Feb. 22, 2017)
Case details for

Frances v. Sessions

Case Details

Full title:GUILLERMO ANDRADE FRANCES, AKA Guillermo Andrade, Petitioner, v. JEFF B…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Feb 22, 2017

Citations

No. 15-73235 (9th Cir. Feb. 22, 2017)