Sukhdarshan Singh v. Eric Holder, Jr. ( 2010 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION DEC 27 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T O F AP PE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SUKHDARSHAN SINGH, a.k.a. Darshan No. 09-71238
Singh,
Agency No. A092-176-260
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 14, 2010 **
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.
Sukhdarshan Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of a
Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration
judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
novo questions of law, Banuelos-Ayon v. Holder, 611 F.3d 1080, 1082 (9th Cir.
2010), and we deny the petition for review.
We agree with the agency’s conclusion that Singh is removable as an
aggravated felon under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) because his conviction for
violating Cal. Penal Code § 273.5(e) categorically constitutes a crime of violence
and Singh was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of at least one year. See
Banuelos-Ayon, 611 F.3d at 1086 (Cal. Penal Code § 273.5 is categorically a crime
of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16(a)). Singh’s contention that Cal. Penal Code
§ 273.5 includes reckless and non-violent conduct outside the scope of the term
“crime of violence” is unpersuasive. See United States v. Laurico-Yeno, 590 F.3d
818, 822 & n.4 (9th Cir. 2010).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 09-71238