MEMORANDUM **
Ewing Redmond Samuels, a native and citizen of Belize, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order declining to remand and dismissing his appeal from an immigration judges (“IJ”) decision finding him removable and that he abandoned the opportunity to file an asylum application. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo claims of due process violations in immigration proceedings. Jiang v. Holder, 754 F.3d 733, 738 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
Samuels does not raise, and therefore waives, any challenge to the BIAs determination not to remand for further competency analysis, the agencys removability determination, or the agencys finding that he abandoned his opportunity to apply for asylum. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically raised and argued in an opening brief are waived).
Samuelss contentions that the IJ and the BIA violated his right to due process fail. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error to prevail on a due process claim).
We do not consider the materials Samuels references in his opening brief that are not part of the administrative record. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 963-64 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
We lack jurisdiction to consider Samuelss contentions as to the validity of his criminal conviction because the issue is not properly before the court. See Ramirez-Villalpando v. Holder, 645 F.3d 1035, 1041 (9th Cir. 2011) (petitioner may not collaterally attack the state court conviction on which his removal order was based in a petition for review of a BIA decision). In light of this disposition, we need not reach Samuelss remaining challenges related to his conviction.
Samuelss emergency motion (Docket Entry No. 27) is denied. To the extent Samuels seeks to challenge his detention, he must seek relief in district court.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.