U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 2010

Ledezma-Galvan v. Holder

Ledezma-Galvan v. Holder
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Decided April 16, 2010 · Rymer, McKeown, Paez
376 F. App'x 683

Ledezma-Galvan v. Holder

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Grasiela Ledezma-Galvan, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order affirming an immigration judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo constitutional questions and questions of law, Vasquez-Zavala v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1105, 1107 (9th Cir. 2003), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA properly concluded that Ledez-ma-Galvan was ineligible for pre-hearing voluntary departure because she failed to withdraw her application for cancellation of removal. See 8 C.F.R. § 1240.26(b)(l)(i)(B). Contrary to Ledez-ma-Galvan’s assertion, an alien’s eligibility for voluntary departure is a question of law which the BIA is permitted by regulation to review de novo. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.1(d)(3)(ii). It follows that Ledez-ma-Galvan’s due process claim fails. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error and prejudice for a petitioner to prevail on a due process claim).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

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

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