Case ID: f-appx_89/html/0099-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ernesto MEZA-ESCALANTE, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-73719.
    Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
      Submitted Feb. 17, 2004.
    
    Decided Feb. 25, 2004.
    Gary Finn, Attorney at Law, Indio, CA, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, District Director, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Executive Office of Immigration Review, Office of Immigration Judge, San Diego, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Richard M. Evans, Patricia K. Buchanan, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before FERNANDEZ, W. FLETCHER, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Ernesto Meza-Escalante, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order of removal. We have jurisdiction to determine our own jurisdiction, see Alarcon-Serrano v. INS, 220 F.3d 1116, 1119 (9th Cir.2000), and we dismiss the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ and BIA’s conclusion that it had “reason to believe” that Meza-Escalante was an illicit trafficker of marijuana. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(C). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction to review the order of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C); see also Alarcon-Serrano, 220 F.3d at 1120.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.