Villicana Pena v. Holder
Villicana Pena v. Holder
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Maria Enriqueta Villicana Pena, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review *782 of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo claims of due process violations, including ineffective assistance of counsel claims. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Villicana Pena’s motion to reopen where she failed to establish that ineffective assistance of counsel may have affected the outcome of her case. See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim a petitioner must demonstrate prejudice).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provid *782 ed by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.