From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ortega-Sanchez v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Oct 2, 2013
540 F. App'x 749 (9th Cir. 2013)

Opinion

No. 10-72614 Agency No. A077-596-084

2013-10-02

ESTEBAN ORTEGA-SANCHEZ, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION


MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.


On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Before: RAWLINSON, N.R. SMITH, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

Esteban Ortega-Sanchez, 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") decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency's determination regarding continuous physical presence, Gutierrez v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency's conclusion that Ortega-Sanchez failed to establish ten years of continuous physical presence in the United States prior to the service of his Notice to Appear because Ortega-Sanchez knowingly and voluntarily accepted administrative voluntary departure in lieu of appearing before an IJ during the relevant ten-year period. See id. at 1117-18 (acceptance of voluntary departure terminates physical presence if petitioner understood he had the right to go before an IJ and chose to depart instead).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.


Summaries of

Ortega-Sanchez v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Oct 2, 2013
540 F. App'x 749 (9th Cir. 2013)
Case details for

Ortega-Sanchez v. Holder

Case Details

Full title:ESTEBAN ORTEGA-SANCHEZ, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Oct 2, 2013

Citations

540 F. App'x 749 (9th Cir. 2013)