NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 20 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ABEL SANCHEZ LINARES, AKA Abel No. 16-71969
Hernandez, AKA Angel Hernandez, AKA
Abel Sanchez, AKA Abel Linares Sanchez, Agency No. A205-311-710
AKA Angel Sanchez,
Petitioner, MEMORANDUM*
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Abel Sanchez Linares, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s order of removal. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 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 for substantial evidence the agency’s adverse credibility
determination, and review de novo questions of law. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d
1034, 1039, 1048 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition
for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility
determination, where Sanchez Linares’ testimony regarding his entry to the United
States was internally inconsistent and inconsistent with the documentary evidence
he provided. See id. at 1046-48 (adverse credibility determination supported under
the totality of the circumstances). Because Sanchez Linares’ testimony was not
credible, and he did not provide sufficient documentary evidence regarding the
time, place, and manner of his entry, the agency properly determined that he failed
to meet his burden of establishing that he entered the United States lawfully. See
8 U.S.C. §§ 1229a(c)(2), 1361; 8 C.F.R. § 1240.8(c).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Sanchez Linares’ unexhausted contentions
regarding the alleged ineffective assistance of counsel or his eligibility for relief.
See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010) (the court lacks
jurisdiction to consider legal claims not presented in an alien’s administrative
proceedings before the agency); Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 963 (9th Cir. 1996) (en
banc) (new evidence may be added to the record through a motion to reopen with
the agency).
2 16-71969
We also lack jurisdiction to consider Sanchez Linares’ request for
prosecutorial discretion. See Vilchiz-Soto v. Holder, 688 F.3d 642, 644 (9th Cir.
2012) (order).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
3 16-71969