Case ID: f-appx_84/html/0833-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Jose Bedolla ZAVALA, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 02-72652.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 8, 2003.
    
    Decided Dec. 18, 2003.
    Jose Bedolla Zavala, A#178^7-318, pro se, Eloy, AZ, for Petitioner.
    Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, San Francisco, CA, District Director, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Phoenix, AZ, Emily A. Radford, Esq., Michele Y.F. Sarko, Attorney, Linda S. Wernery, Esq., Thankful T. Vanderstar, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before GOODWIN, WALLACE, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Jose Bedolla Zavala, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision summarily dismissing his appeal from an Immigration Judge’s decision finding him removable due to his guilty plea conviction on one count of possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine, in violation of Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11377(a). Our jurisdiction over Zavala’s petition for review is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), which states that “no court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed a criminal offense covered in 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), (B),(C), or (D).” Because Zavala was convicted of an offense covered by 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), we lack jurisdiction over his petition for review. See Cruz-Aguilera v. INS, 245 F.Sd 1070, 1073 (9th Cir.2001) (indicating that a conviction under Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11377(a) for possession of methamphetamine qualifies as a controlled substance offense).

All pending motions are denied as moot.

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.