U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2008

Pineda-Cruz v. Mukasey

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided August 1, 2008

286 F. App'x 488

Counsel

Teodora D. Purcell, Esquire, Aguirre Law Group, APC, San Diego, CA, for Petitioner., David V. Bernal, Esquire, OIL, Russell J.E. Verby, Esquire, Teresa A. Wallbaum, Esquire, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, CAS-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre Office of the District Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM **

Guillermo Alfonso Pineda-Cruz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s order determining that Pineda-Cruz is removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(C)(i), as an illicit trafficker of marijuana. We have jurisdiction to determine our own jurisdiction, Lopez-Molina v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 1206, 1208 (9th Cir. 2004), and we dismiss the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that it had reason to believe Pineda-Cruz knowingly colluded with others in the illicit trafficking of marijuana. Pineda-Cruz’s sworn statement indicated that he accepted $200 to accompany his cousin across the border and was aware that there were drugs in the car his cousin was driving. See Alarcon-Serrano v. INS, 220 F.3d 1116, 1120 (9th Cir. 2000). We therefore lack jurisdiction over the *489petition for review. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C); Lopez-Molina, 368 F.3d at 1209.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.