From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gutierrez-Chavez v. I.N.S.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 31, 2002
337 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2002)

Summary

holding that aliens may file § 2241 petitions that "allege constitutional or statutory error in the removal process," but "[h]abeas petitions that, on the other hand, do not allege such error but simply seek to change the discretionary result reached by the INS are not within the scope of § 2241 and should be denied"

Summary of this case from Cadet v. Bulger

Opinion

No. 00-56149.

Argued and Submitted October 16, 2001.

Filed July 31, 2002. Amended July 22, 2003.

Victor D. Nieblas (argued), Law Office of Victor D. Nieblas Pradis, Los Angeles, California, for the petitioner-appellant.

Cindy S. Ferrier (argued), United States Department of Justice, Appearances only by David W. Ogden, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Kristen A. Chapman, United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, and John P. Moran, United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for the respondents-appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California; Dean D. Pregerson, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CV-99-07228-DDP.

Before B. FLETCHER, D.W. NELSON, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.


ORDER

The opinion filed July 31, 2002, is amended as follows:

298 F.3d 824, 829, line 23 (second column, after "apple"):

Add the following footnote: "We do not confront here a claim of failure to exercise discretion or manifest injustice."

With this amendment, a majority of the panel has voted to deny Petitioner-Appellant's petition for rehearing. Judge McKeown voted to grant the petition for rehearing. Judge B. Fletcher and Judge D.W. Nelson voted to deny the petition for rehearing.

The petition for rehearing is DENIED.


Summaries of

Gutierrez-Chavez v. I.N.S.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Jul 31, 2002
337 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2002)

holding that aliens may file § 2241 petitions that "allege constitutional or statutory error in the removal process," but "[h]abeas petitions that, on the other hand, do not allege such error but simply seek to change the discretionary result reached by the INS are not within the scope of § 2241 and should be denied"

Summary of this case from Cadet v. Bulger

holding court lacked habeas jurisdiction to review IJ's discretionary decision denying application for 212(c) relief

Summary of this case from YI v. RIDGE

rejecting due process claim based on inadequate translation because petitioner failed to demonstrate a better translation likely would have affected the outcome of the proceedings

Summary of this case from Postescu v. Holder

noting that habeas relief is not available to challenge purely discretionary decisions

Summary of this case from Wong v. Ponce
Case details for

Gutierrez-Chavez v. I.N.S.

Case Details

Full title:Gustavo GUTIERREZ-CHAVEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. IMMIGRATION AND…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 31, 2002

Citations

337 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2002)

Citing Cases

YI v. RIDGE

Several courts have reached this conclusion in the context of habeas petitions seeking review of the denial…

Wong v. Ponce

The BOP's program statement also does not entitle petitioner to maximum RRC placement. Petitioner alleges…