Skip to main content


Reset A A Font size: Print

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Jose Manuel MACHORRO-ZAMORA, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 18-70801

Decided: November 25, 2019

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. Jose Manuel Machorro-Zamora, Pro Se Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Anthony Cardozo Payne, Senior Litigation Counsel, Jessica Danielle Strokus, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent


Jose Manuel Machorro-Zamora, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of his motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen and review de novo claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying reopening based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Machorro-Zamora did not show his former attorney failed to perform with sufficient competence by declining to file an application for cancellation of removal, where Machorro-Zamora was ineligible for that relief at the time. See id. at 793 (to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel, a petitioner must show counsel failed to perform with sufficient competence); Torres-Chavez v. Holder, 567 F.3d 1096, 1101 (9th Cir. 2009) (declining to find ineffective assistance where counsel made a tactical decision; court must evaluate counsel’s decisions from counsel’s perspective at the time).


Copied to clipboard