Case ID: f-appx_321/html/0670-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joshua Emanuel RICHMAN, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 06-72245.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 18, 2009.
    
    Filed April 8, 2009.
    Joshua Emanuel Richman, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.
    CAC-District Counsel, Esquire, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. Lefevre, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Angela Liang, OIL, Janice Kay Redfern, Esquire, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and TASHIMA, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Joshua Emanuel Richman, a native and citizen of Jamaica, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Fernandez-Ruiz v. Gonzales, 468 F.3d 1159, 1163 (9th Cir.2006). Reviewing de novo, id., we deny the petition for review.

We agree with the BIA that the IJ did not err in admitting Richman’s conviction documents where they were “attested by the official having legal custody of the record or by an authorized deputy,” 8 C.F.R. § 287.6(a), and the record contains a sufficient basis for the documents’ authentication. See Sinotes-Cruz v. Gonzales, 468 F.3d 1190, 1196-97 (9th Cir.2006) (“The guiding principle is that proper authentication requires some sort of proof that the document is what it purports to be.”).

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