FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 02 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE GUADALUPE RUANO- No. 13-74488
RODRIGUEZ,
Agency No. A042-215-351
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted February 24, 2016**
Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Jose Guadalupe Ruano-Rodriguez, 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 decision finding him removable and denying
his applications for cancellation of removal, asylum, withholding of removal, and
*
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).
relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is
governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Although 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) bars jurisdiction
over final orders of removal when an alien has been convicted of an aggravated
felony, § 1252(a)(2)(D) permits our review of questions of law. Perez-Palafox v.
Holder, 744 F.3d 1138, 1144 (9th Cir. 2014). We review de novo questions of
law, Vilchez v. Holder, 682 F.3d 1195, 1198 (9th Cir. 2012), and review for
substantial evidence the denial of CAT relief. Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066,
1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Ruano-Rodriguez’s conviction under California Health & Safety Code
§ 11351.5 is categorically an aggravated felony for illicit trafficking in a controlled
substance as defined by 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(B) that renders him removable
under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). See United States v. Morales-Perez, 467 F.3d
1219, 1223 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that a § 11351.5 conviction categorically
qualifies as a drug trafficking offense under the Sentencing Guidelines); Rendon v.
Mukasey, 520 F.3d 967, 976 (9th Cir. 2008) (“[P]ossession of a controlled
substance with the intent to sell contains a trafficking element and is an aggravated
felony.”).
Contrary to Ruano-Rodriguez’s contentions, the BIA did not find that his
conviction was a per se particularly serious crime that rendered him ineligible for
2 13-74488
withholding of removal. The BIA applied the correct presumption in Matter of
Y-L-, 23 I. & N. Dec. 270 (A.G. 2002), to determine that his conviction constituted
a particularly serious crime. We lack further jurisdiction over Ruano-Rodriguez’s
withholding of removal claim. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) (barring jurisdiction
over final orders of removal when an alien has been convicted of an aggravated
felony).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief on the
ground that Ruano failed to demonstrate it is more likely than not he would be
tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to
Mexico. See Silaya, 524 F.3d at 1073.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
3 13-74488