Enrique Villarreal-Martinez v. Jefferson Sessions

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS JUN 15 2018 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ENRIQUE REYES VILLARREAL- No. 16-71239 MARTINEZ, Agency No. A091-231-340 Petitioner, v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 12, 2018** Before: RAWLINSON, CLIFTON, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges. Enrique Reyes Villarreal-Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying withholding of removal and protection * 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). Accordingly, Villarreal- Martinez’s request for oral argument is denied. under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law. Ahmed v. Holder, 569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the petition for review. Villarreal-Martinez does not raise, and therefore waives, any challenge to the agency’s determination that he is ineligible for CAT relief, or to its fact-based determination that his conviction for burglary of a habitation under Texas Penal Code (“TPC”) § 30.02(c)(2) is a particularly serious crime, rendering him ineligible for withholding of removal. See Lopez-Vasquez v. Holder, 706 F.3d 1072, 1079-80 (9th Cir. 2013) (issues not specifically argued in an opening brief are waived). Villarreal-Martinez’s general contention that only an aggravated felony can be a particularly serious crime is foreclosed by Delgado v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1095, 1102 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc). To the extent he contends that the interpretation of the particularly serious crime bar in Delgado v. Holder is overbroad, a three-judge panel cannot overrule circuit precedent in the absence of an intervening decision from a higher court. See Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 677 (9th Cir. 2011). We need not reach Villarreal-Martinez’s contention that his conviction under TPC § 30.02(c)(2) is not an aggravated felony. See Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required to reach non- dispositive issues). 2 16-71239 Villarreal-Martinez’s request to hold the case in abeyance pending the Supreme Court’s decision reviewing Dimaya v. Lynch, 803 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2015) is denied as moot, where a decision has since issued in Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 3 16-71239 16-71239 Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ca9 9th Cir. Enrique Villarreal-Martinez v. Jefferson Sessions 15 June 2018 Agency Unpublished 1a4ddac7c12293ae1851f2297529347e6c3962a9

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals