FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION SEP 24 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
EDUARDO ALFREDO VERA- No. 08-73601
MORLAS, a.k.a. Eduardo Vera Morales,
Agency No. A034-188-057
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 13, 2010 **
Before: SILVERMAN, CALLAHAN, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Eduardo Alfredo Vera-Morlas, a native and citizen of Ecuador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
*
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).
§ 1252. We review de novo questions of law, including whether a conviction
qualifies as a crime involving moral turpitude. See Galeana-Mendoza v. Gonzales,
465 F.3d 1054, 1056-57 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
We disagree with Vera-Morlas’ contention that the BIA’s order specifically
limited the proceedings on remand and that the government therefore was barred
from filing additional charges of removability on remand. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1240.10(e) (“At any time during the proceeding, additional or substituted charges
of [removability]...may be lodged”). In addition, the doctrine of res judicata does
not bar the government from filing additional charges of removability against
Vera-Morlas because the BIA’s remand order is not a final judgment, rendered on
the merits in a separate action. See Valencia-Alvarez v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 1319,
1323-24 (9th Cir. 2006).
The agency properly found Vera-Morlas removable under 8 U.S.C. §
1227(a)(2)(A)(ii) by determining that his petty theft and grand theft convictions are
categorically crimes involving moral turpitude. See United States v. Esparza-
Ponce, 193 F.3d 1133, 1136-37 (9th Cir. 1999) (holding that petty theft constitutes
a crime involving moral turpitude); see also Rashtabadi v. INS, 23 F.3d 1562, 1568
(9th Cir. 1994) (holding that grand theft is a crime involving moral turpitude).
2 08-73601
Vera-Morlas’ remaining contentions are unavailing.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 08-73601