Anthony Eliseo v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 471 F. App'x 633 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                             MAR 07 2012
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    ANTHONY LUNA ELISEO,                             No. 10-71233
    Petitioner,                        Agency No. A075-475-581
    v.
    MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted March 5, 2012 **
    Pasadena, California
    Before: PREGERSON, GOULD, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    Anthony Luna Eliseo (“Eliseo”), a native and citizen of the Philippines, and
    a legal permanent resident of the United States, petitions for review of the Board of
    *
    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).
    Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order finding removability. We have jurisdiction
    under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    , and we deny the petition.
    Eliseo’s conviction for violating California Health and Safety Code § 11378
    is an aggravated felony under 
    8 U.S.C. § 1101
    (a)(43)(B); see Cazarez-Gutierrez v.
    Ashcroft, 
    382 F.3d 905
    , 919 (9th Cir. 2004) (a state drug offense is an aggravated
    felony for immigration purposes if it contains a trafficking element). Contrary to
    Eliseo’s contention, the record of conviction namely the admission to the charges
    alleged by the Department of Homeland Security established that Eliseo was
    convicted of § 11378, possession for sale of a controlled substance, to wit
    methamphetamine. See Pagayon v. Holder, Nos.07-74047, 07-75129, 
    2011 WL 6091276
    , *4 (9th Cir. Dec. 8, 2011) (holding that “an alien’s concession of
    removability or admission of facts establishing removability, if accepted by the IJ
    completely relieves the government of the burden of producing evidence ”).
    Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-71233

Citation Numbers: 471 F. App'x 633

Judges: Gould, Pregerson, Tallman

Filed Date: 3/7/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/5/2023