FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JUL 01 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
DESIDERIO CORONA-MARTINEZ, No. 06-70724
Petitioner, Agency No. A092-802-425
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 17, 2010 **
San Francisco, California
Before: SCHROEDER and BYBEE, Circuit Judges, and STOTLER, Senior
District Judge.***
The Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) did not err in affirming the
decision of the Immigration Judge denying Corona-Martinez’s application for
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
***
The Honorable Alicemarie H. Stotler, Senior United States District
Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation.
cancellation of removal. Aliens who commit “[c]ertain firearm offenses” cannot
obtain cancellation of removal. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1227(a)(2)(C), 1229b(b)(1)(C).
Section 1227 lists the “carrying” of a firearm as one such offense rendering an
alien ineligible for relief. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(C). Corona-Martinez’s conviction
of “carrying a loaded firearm” in violation of California Penal Code § 12031(a)(1)
therefore precludes him from obtaining cancellation of removal. See Gonzalez-
Gonzalez v. Ashcroft, 390 F.3d 649, 652 (9th Cir. 2004).
The BIA and Immigration Judge did not deprive Corona-Martinez of his due
process and equal protection rights. Because Corona-Martinez is statutorily
ineligible for cancellation of removal, he cannot demonstrate that any of the
alleged due process violations prejudiced him. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d
532, 537-38 (9th Cir. 2004). Corona-Martinez’s equal protection argument fails
because there is a rational basis for denying relief to aliens who commit firearms
offenses. See Avila-Sanchez v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 1037, 1041 (9th Cir. 2007).
The petition for review is DENIED.
2