Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Elina Zalome ERAZO ALVAREZ, Petitioner, v. Merrick B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.
Elina Zalome Erazo Alvarez, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing her appeal from the Immigration Judge's decision denying her application for special rule cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2). The Board found that Erazo Alvarez did not establish eligibility for relief because she failed to demonstrate that she was battered or subjected to extreme cruelty. We possess jurisdiction to review the Board's decision only to the extent Erazo Alvarez asserts questions of law and constitutional claims. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), (D); Jean v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 475, 479-80 (4th Cir. 2006) (holding that, under § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i), (D), Court has no jurisdiction over any aspects of denial of relief under § 1229b except constitutional claims or questions of law). Erazo Alvarez's sole legal claim – that the Board applied the wrong legal standard in reviewing her appeal – lacks merit. We do not have jurisdiction over her remaining claims, none of which present questions of law or constitutional claims. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal questions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART
PER CURIAM:
Petition denied in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
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.
Docket No: No. 20-1818
Decided: June 25, 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
FindLaw for Legal Professionals
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)