NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUL 13 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS BORISLAV NIKOLOV ZAPRIANOV, No. 16-72930 Petitioner, Agency No. A046-320-206 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted October 15, 2019 Pasadena, California Before: WARDLAW and COLLINS, Circuit Judges, and SETTLE,** District Judge. Borislav Zaprianov petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (“BIA”) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his request for a continuance of the proceeding and his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under section 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition. * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The Honorable Benjamin H. Settle, United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington, sitting by designation. Zaprianov is a native and citizen of Bulgaria. In March 2000, Zaprianov pleaded guilty in Arizona state court to solicitation to commit fraudulent schemes and artifices, “committed on or between 8/12/94 and 8/17/94,” in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 13-1002 and 13-2310. He was sentenced to three years of probation and was ordered to pay $10,127.56 in restitution. In March 2003, Zaprianov was convicted in California state court of corporal injury to a spouse/cohabitant, in violation of California Penal Code § 273.5. In July 2008, the Government commenced removal proceedings against Zaprianov based on his conviction for domestic violence. In response, Zaprianov sought cancellation of removal, which the Government opposed arguing that Zaprianov’s Arizona conviction constituted an “aggravated felony” that rendered him ineligible for cancellation. During the proceedings, the IJ granted Zaprianov multiple continuances to research or resolve issues relating to the Arizona conviction. In March 2014, Zaprianov filed an application in Arizona state court to vacate his conviction pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 13-905–13-912. Two months later, the IJ denied Zaprianov’s request for an additional continuance pending resolution of Zaprianov’s application in Arizona state court. The IJ then concluded that Zaprianov’s prior conviction was for an “aggravated felony,” denied his application for cancellation of removal, and ordered him removed. Shortly 2 thereafter, the Arizona court granted Zaprianov’s application to vacate his conviction. Zaprianov appealed to the BIA, which affirmed the IJ’s decision and dismissed the appeal. 1. The BIA did not err in affirming the IJ’s decision to deny an additional continuance. Zaprianov’s application in Arizona state court invoked Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 13-905–13-912, which authorized the sentencing court to grant relief “on fulfillment of the conditions of probation or sentence and discharge by the court.” ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 13-907(A) (2014) (later renumbered as § 13-905). In Poblete Mendoza v. Holder, we held that vacatur under § 13-907 “was for rehabilitative purposes and therefore, the government could use this conviction in [a] subsequent removal proceeding.” 606 F.3d 1137, 1142 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals