Mena v. Holder , 357 F. App'x 846 ( 2009 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 08 2009
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
RODOLFO HERRERA MENA, No. 07-73671
Petitioner, Agency No. A092-878-235
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 17, 2009 **
Before: ALARCÓN, TROTT, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
Rodolfo Herrera Mena, 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”) removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without
oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
IH/Research
§ 1252. We review de novo whether a particular conviction constitutes an
aggravated felony, Randhawa v. Ashcroft, 298 F.3d 1148, 1151 (9th Cir. 2002),
and we deny the petition for review.
The IJ properly determined that Herrera Mena is removable as an aggravated
felon under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) because his conviction under California
Health & Safety Code § 11351 was for “illicit trafficking in a controlled
substance” as defined by 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(B). See Rendon v. Mukasey, 520
F.3d 967, 976 (9th Cir. 2008) (“[P]ossession of a controlled substance with the
intent to sell contains a trafficking element and is an aggravated felony.”). We
reject Herrera Mena’s contention that the record of conviction was insufficient to
establish that his conviction related to a federally controlled substance. See United
States v. Alvarez, 972 F.2d 1000, 1005-06 (9th Cir. 1992), overruled on other
grounds by Kawashima v. Mukasey, 530 F.3d 1111 (9th Cir. 2008).
Petitioner’s remaining contentions lack merit.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
IH/Research 2 07-73671