FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION FEB 28 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RICCI PEREZ-GOMEZ, No. 07-71371
Petitioner, Agency No. A035-666-925
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 15, 2011 **
Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Ricci Perez-Gomez, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, petitions for review
of the Board of Immgiration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision dismissing his appeal from
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Castillo-Cruz v. Holder, 581 F.3d
*
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).
1154, 1158-59 (9th Cir. 2009), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition
for review.
The IJ determined that Perez-Gomez was removable under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii), as an alien who has been convicted of two crimes involving
moral turpitude, and that he was ineligible for former section 212(c) relief. We
lack jurisdiction to review these determinations because Perez-Gomez failed to
challenge them before the BIA and thereby failed to exhaust his administrative
remedies. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004). Perez-
Gomez’s contention that he qualifies for an exception to the exhaustion
requirement is unpersuasive.
Because Perez-Gomez’s 1985 conviction for lewd and lascivious acts with a
child under fourteen in violation of Cal. Penal Code § 288(a) constitutes an
aggravated felony as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(A), see United States v.
Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144, 1146-47 (9th Cir. 1999), the agency did not err in
concluding that he was statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal under
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(3). See Aragon-Ayon v. INS, 206 F.3d 847, 853 (9th Cir.
2000) (“Congress intended the 1996 amendments to make the aggravated felony
definition apply retroactively to all defined offenses whenever committed . . . ”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
2 07-71371