FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION JAN 27 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
VICTOR NOEL SILLAS-IRIBE, AKA No. 14-72715
Lerma Victor Urias,
Agency No. A205-714-613
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 20, 2016**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.
Victor Noel Sillas-Iribe, a native and citizen of Mexico, 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, Vilchez v. Holder, 682 F.3d 1195,
1198 (9th Cir. 2012), and we deny the petition for review.
The BIA correctly concluded that Sillas-Iribe’s conviction under California
Health & Safety Code § 11350(a) is for a crime “relating to a controlled
substance,” rendering him removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(II), where
the plea agreement refers to “Count 1: 11350(a)” and count 1 of the felony
complaint specifies cocaine. See 21 U.S.C. § 812(c), sched. II(a)(4); Coronado v.
Holder, 759 F.3d 977, 986 (9th Cir. 2014) (“Where the minute order or other
equally reliable document specifies that a defendant pleaded guilty to a particular
count of a criminal complaint, the court may consider the facts alleged in the
complaint.”); United States v. Torre-Jimenez, 771 F.3d 1163, 1168-69 (9th Cir.
2014) (“the phrase ‘as charged in the Information (or Indictment)’ is not required
where the documents are unambiguous”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 14-72715