From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martinez v. Ashcroft

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 26, 2004
95 F. App'x 905 (9th Cir. 2004)

Opinion

Submitted: April 12, 2004.

This 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION.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)

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Walter Rafael Pineda, Law Offices of Walter Rafael Pineda, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Ernesto H, Molina, Jr., Kurt B. Larson, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.


Before O'SCANNLAIN, RYMER, and BEA, 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 Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Nancy Ramirez Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") summarily affirming, without opinion, pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(a)(7), an immigration judge's denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal. The petitioner's sole contention is that the BIA's decision "without opinion" does not comport with due process. This contention is foreclosed by Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849-51 (9th Cir.2003) (holding that the BIA does not violate due process by affirming pursuant to its streamlining regulations an immigration judge's decision without issuing an opinion).

Pursuant to Desta v. Ashcroft, 365 F.3d 741(9th Cir.2004) petitioner's motion for stay of removal included a timely request for stay of voluntary departure. Because the motion for stay of removal was granted, or continued based on the government's filing of a notice of non-opposition, the voluntary departure period was also stayed, nunc pro tunc, to the filing of the motion for stay of removal and this stay will expire upon issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.


Summaries of

Martinez v. Ashcroft

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Apr 26, 2004
95 F. App'x 905 (9th Cir. 2004)
Case details for

Martinez v. Ashcroft

Case Details

Full title:Nancy Ramirez MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Apr 26, 2004

Citations

95 F. App'x 905 (9th Cir. 2004)