AGUILAR ROQUE v. GARLAND (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-05-26No. No. 20-71454

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court denied in part and dismissed in part the petition for review because Aguilar-Roque waived challenges to the asylum and withholding of removal denials by failing to raise them in his opening brief, did not challenge the CAT denial, and lacked an exhausted ineffective assistance of counsel claim that was beyond the court's jurisdiction to review.

Vidal Antonio Aguilar-Roque, a Salvadoran national, sought judicial review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision upholding an immigration judge's denial of his asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture relief claims. In his pro se petition, Aguilar-Roque failed to raise specific arguments challenging the adverse credibility finding underlying the asylum and withholding of removal denials, and he did not contest the CAT relief denial. Additionally, he raised an ineffective assistance of counsel claim that he had not presented to the agency during the administrative process.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Waiver of issues not raised in opening brief on appeal
Exhaustion requirement for administrative remedies before judicial review
Standard of review for credibility determinations in immigration proceedings

Procedural posture

Aguilar-Roque filed a pro se petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order affirming an immigration judge's decision denying asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

MEMORANDUM **

Vidal Antonio Aguilar-Roque, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order affirming without opinion an immigration judges decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Even construed liberally, Aguilar-Roques pro se opening brief does not raise any challenge to the denial of his asylum and withholding of removal claims based on an adverse credibility determination. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a partys opening brief are waived). Aguilar-Roque also does not raise any challenge to the agencys denial of relief under the CAT. See id.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Aguilar-Roques unexhausted contention that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not presented to the agency).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.