Mario MIRANDA CASTRO, aka Luis Hernandez Miranda, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.
Decided: September 11, 2020
Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Zulu Ali, Law Office of Zulu Ali, Riverside, CA, for Petitioner Rachel Louise Browning, Trial Attorney, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Juria L. Jones, Trial Attorney, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent
Mario Miranda Castro, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's (“IJ”) decision denying his request for a continuance. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to continue and review de novo claims of due process violations. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion by denying Miranda Castro's motion for a continuance to seek post-conviction relief for failure to show good cause, where post-conviction relief remained speculative at the time of his final hearing. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29; Singh v. Holder, 638 F.3d 1264, 1274 (9th Cir. 2011) (“[T]he IJ [is] not required to grant a continuance based on ․ speculations.”).
Miranda Castro's due process claim fails, where he has not established prejudice. See Gomez-Velazco v. Sessions, 879 F.3d 989, 993 (9th Cir. 2018).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate. The motion for a stay of removal is otherwise denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.