Jose MacHorro-zamora v. William Barr ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                               NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       NOV 25 2019
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    JOSE MANUEL MACHORRO-ZAMORA,                    No.    18-70801
    Petitioner,                     Agency No. A200-947-704
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted November 18, 2019**
    Before:      CANBY, TASHIMA, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
    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
    *
    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).
    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).
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    2                                    18-70801
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-70801

Filed Date: 11/25/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/25/2019