Mario Miranda Castro v. William Barr ( 2020 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS SEP 11 2020
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIO MIRANDA CASTRO, AKA Luis No. 19-72279
Hernandez Miranda,
Agency No. A092-724-394
Petitioner,
v. MEMORANDUM*
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 8, 2020**
Before: TASHIMA, SILVERMAN, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Mario Miranda Castro, 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”) decision denying his request for a continuance. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
*
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).
denial of a motion to continue and review de novo claims of due process
violations. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008). We
deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion by denying Miranda Castro’s motion
for a continuance to seek post-conviction relief for failure to show good cause,
where post-conviction relief remained speculative at the time of his final hearing.
See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29; Singh v. Holder, 638 F.3d 1264, 1274 (9th Cir. 2011)
(“[T]he IJ [is] not required to grant a continuance based on . . . speculations.”).
Miranda Castro’s due process claim fails, where he has not established
prejudice. See Gomez-Velazco v. Sessions, 879 F.3d 989, 993 (9th Cir. 2018).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the
mandate. The motion for a stay of removal is otherwise denied.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 19-72279