DLD-169 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
___________
No. 10-1687
___________
MARIO MARTINEZ-MORENO,
Petitioner
v.
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES,
Respondent
____________________________________
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
(Agency No. A093-493-231)
Immigration Judge: Honorable Frederic G. Leeds
____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I. O. P. 10.6
April 15, 2010
Before: FUENTES, JORDAN and HARDIMAN, Circuit Judges
(Opinion filed: April 21, 2010)
___________
OPINION
___________
PER CURIAM
Mario Martinez-Moreno, a native and citizen of Mexico, entered the United States
unlawfully in 1994. Approximately two years later, in April 1996, he was convicted in
New Jersey Superior Court for possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance
on or near school property. See N.J.S.A. § 2C:35-7 (2005).
In December 2007, Martinez-Moreno was served with a Notice to Appear charging
him with removability as an alien present in the United States without being admitted or
paroled. See INA § 212(a)(6)(A)(i) [8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i)]. Martinez-Moreno
conceded removability but sought cancellation of removal under INA § 240A(b) [8
U.S.C. § 1229b(b)]. Following a hearing, the Immigration Judge (IJ) denied his
application on the ground that his New Jersey controlled substances conviction rendered
him ineligible for relief. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(C). By order entered February 5,
2010, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision. Martinez-Moreno filed a timely petition for
review in this Court.1 The government now moves for summary action.
Upon review, we agree with the government that the BIA correctly concluded that
Martinez-Moreno is ineligible for cancellation of removal due to his controlled substance
conviction. 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(C) renders an alien ineligible for cancellation of
removal if he has been convicted of an offense under § 1182(a)(2). Section 1182(a)(2), in
turn, states that an alien is inadmissible if he has been convicted of “a violation of . . . any
law or regulation of a State . . . relating to a controlled substance.” 8 U.S.C. §
1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II). Because Martinez-Moreno’s conviction under N.J.S.A. § 2C:35-7
clearly meets this description,2 he is ineligible for cancellation of removal.
1
We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1).
2
8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) refers to Section 802 of Title 21 for a definition of
“controlled substance.”
2
Because the appeal presents no substantial question, see Third Cir. LAR 27.4 and
I. O. P. 10.6, we grant the motion and will deny Martinez-Moreno’s petition for review.
The motion for a stay of removal is denied.
3