FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 10 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JESUS HERNANDEZ-ANDRADE, No. 09-70452
Petitioner, Agency No. A095-663-103
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.
Jesus Hernandez-Andrade, 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”) 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, Cazarez-Gutierrez v. Ashcroft, 382
F.3d 905, 909 (9th Cir. 2004), and review for abuse of discretion the denial of a
continuance, Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008) (per
curiam). We deny the petition for review.
Contrary to Hernandez-Andrade’s contention, his conviction under
California Penal Code § 273.5(a) is categorically a crime of domestic violence
under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(E)(i). See Banuelos-Ayon v. Holder, 611 F.3d 1080,
1083-1086 (9th Cir. 2010).
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying a continuance where
Hernandez-Andrade did not demonstrate good cause. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29 (IJ
may grant motion for a continuance for good cause shown); Baires v. INS, 856
F.2d 89, 92-93 (9th Cir. 1988). It follows that Hernandez-Andrade’s due process
challenge fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring
error to prevail on a due process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-70452