Opinion
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 32.1)
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Agency No. A090-526-353.
SAUL ALFREDO LUJAN-SUAREZ, Petitioner, Pro se, Phoenix, AZ.
For ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent: Matthew Albert Connelly, Trial Attorney, OIL, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC; Chief Counsel ICE, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COUNSEL, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA.
Before: FISHER, GOULD, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Saul Alfredo Lujan-Suarez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (" BIA" ) dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's order of removal. We dismiss the petition for review.
Lujan-Suarez does not challenge the BIA's determination that he is removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(C) due to his conviction for misconduct involving weapons under Arizona Revised Statutes § 13-3102. His removability on this basis limits our jurisdiction to constitutional claims and questions of law. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C)-(D).
Lujan-Suarez's assertion that he has resided in the United States since childhood is not a sufficiently colorable claim to invoke our jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D). See Martinez-Rosas v. Gonzales, 424 F.3d 926, 930 (9th Cir. 2005) (" To be colorable in this context, the [question of law] need not be substantial, but the claim must have some possible validity." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.