From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Garcia-Munoz v. Gonzales

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 3, 2006
196 F. App'x 535 (9th Cir. 2006)

Opinion

Submitted: July 24, 2006.

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Charles E. Nichol, Esq., Law Office of Charles E. Nichol, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Emily A. Radford, Esq., Blair T. O'Connor, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent.


On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A76-846-638.

Before: ALARC§N, HAWKINS, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Antonio Garcia-Munoz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen. See Iturribarria v. INS, 321 F.3d 889, 894 (9th Cir.2003). We deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to reopen, because the BIA considered the evidence Garcia-Munoz submitted and acted within its broad discretion in determining that the evidence was insufficient to warrant reopening. See Singh v. INS, 295 F.3d 1037, 1039 (9th Cir.2002) (The BIA's denial of a motion to reopen shall be reversed only if it is "arbitrary, irrational or contrary to law.").

Garcia-Munoz's contention that the BIA violated his equal protection rights by denying cancellation of removal does not amount to a colorable constitutional claim.

Page 536.

See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir.2005) ("[t]raditional abuse of discretion challenges recast as alleged [constitutional] violations do not constitute colorable constitutional claims that would invoke our jurisdiction.").

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.


Summaries of

Garcia-Munoz v. Gonzales

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 3, 2006
196 F. App'x 535 (9th Cir. 2006)
Case details for

Garcia-Munoz v. Gonzales

Case Details

Full title:Antonio GARCIA-MUNOZ, Petitioner, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 3, 2006

Citations

196 F. App'x 535 (9th Cir. 2006)