748 Fed.Appx. 743 (9th Cir. 2018), 14-72341, Chajon v. Sessions

Docket Nº:14-72341
Citation:748 Fed.Appx. 743
Party Name:Jario CHAJON, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
Attorney:Thomas Damien Pamilla, Attorney, Law Offices of Thomas D. Pamilla, APC, Fremont, CA, Christopher John Stender, Esquire, Attorney, Federal Immigration Counselors, AZ, PC, Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner Matthew Allan Spurlock, Attorney, Daniel Eric Goldman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ - U....
Judge Panel:Before: BEA and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges, and SOTO , District Judge.
Case Date:September 05, 2018
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 743

748 Fed.Appx. 743 (9th Cir. 2018)

Jario CHAJON, Petitioner,

v.

Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 14-72341

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

September 5, 2018

Argued and Submitted August 13, 2018 San Francisco, California

Editorial Note:

Governing the citation to unpublished opinions please refer to federal rules of appellate procedure rule 32.1. See also U.S.Ct. of App. 9th Cir. Rule 36-3.

Page 744

Thomas Damien Pamilla, Attorney, Law Offices of Thomas D. Pamilla, APC, Fremont, CA, Christopher John Stender, Esquire, Attorney, Federal Immigration Counselors, AZ, PC, Phoenix, AZ, for Petitioner

Matthew Allan Spurlock, Attorney, Daniel Eric Goldman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Agency No. A XXX-XX0-912

Before: BEA and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges, and SOTO[*], District Judge.

Page 745

MEMORANDUM[**]

Petitioner Jario Chajon ("Chajon"), a native and citizen of Guatemala, appeals the denial by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") of his applications for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). Reviewing both determinations "under the deferential substantial evidence standard," see Ai Jun Zhi v. Holder, 751 F.3d 1088, 1091 (9th Cir. 2014), we deny his petitions for withholding of removal and CAT relief. However, in light of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Pereira v. Sessions, __ U.S. __, 138 S.Ct. 2105, 201 L.Ed.2d 433 (2018), we remand for the BIA to consider whether Chajon is eligible for cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b. Because the parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of this case, we need not recount them here.

1. Chajon challenges the BIAs adverse credibility determination solely on the ground that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance. However, we generally "require an...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP