N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT R OHAN ANTHONY C O OM B S, Pe titione r, v. ER IC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 10-72922 Age n c y No. A037-333-016 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Argue d and Subm itte d August 9, 2013 Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia B e fore : TALLM AN, C LIFTON, a nd C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s. R oha n Anthony

C oom bs, a Ja m a ic an c itiz e n, pe titions for re vie w of a de c ision of theB oa

rd of Im m i gration Appe a ls dismissing a n a ppe a l from

an orde r of re m ova l e n te re d by

an im m igration judgeba se d upon a finding tha

t C oom bs is an a l ie n c onvic te d in C a lifornia

sta te c ourt of posse ssion of m arijua na with inte nt to se ll, a n a ggrav ate d fe lony . B e c a use (1) we la c k jurisdic tion to re vie w his



# FIL ED AUG 16 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.c olla

te ra l atta c k upon his unde rly ing sta te c onvic tion a

nd (2) ne ithe r his pa

rtia l c om ple t ion of the natura l i z ation proc e ss nor his m ilita ry se rvic e c onfe rre d nationa lity

upon him , we DISM ISS in pa rt a nd DENY in pa

rt his pe tition for re vie w. First, C oom

bs a rgue s tha t his unde rly ing 2008 C a lifornia c rim ina l c onvic tion wa s unc onstitutiona l be c a use his de fe nse la

wy e r fa ile d

to inform him of the i m m igration c onse q

u e nc e s of his ple a

a gre e m e nt. 1 W e de te rm ine tha t we la c k jurisdic tion to c onside r the m e rits of this c l a im be c a use it func tions a s a

n im pe rm issiblec olla

te ra l atta c k upon his c onvic t ion. Lope z-J ac uinde v . Holde r, 600 F.3d 1215, 1217 (9th C ir. 2010) (“ [T] h is C ourt re ta ins jurisdic tion to de te rm i ne its jurisdic tion.” ); Ramire z-Villalpando v. Holde r , 645 F.3d 1035, 1041 (9th C ir. 2010) (holding tha t pe titione r c ould not c olla t e ra l ly atta c k his sta

te c ourt c onvic tion on a

pe tition for re vie w of a

B IA de c i sion); Urbina-Mauric i o v . IN S , 989 F.2d 1085, 1089 (9th C ir. 1993).

1 W e do not ta

k e judic ia l notic e of C oom bs’ C a lifornia

Supe rior C ourt filings, inc luding his unsuc c e ssful pe tition for writ of error c oram nobis, in light of 8 U.S.C . § 1252(b)(4)(A) a nd the fa c t

tha t ne ithe r of the c o nditions in Fishe r a llowing for the

c onside ra tion of e xte rna l e vide nc e we re m e t . Se e Fishe r v . IN S, 79 F.3d 955, 964 (9th C ir. 1996) (e n ba nc ). 2Eve n if we ha d jurisdic tion to c onside r this a rgum e nt, C oom

bs would not pre v a i l. B e c a

use his 2008 c onvic tion took plac e two y e ars prior to theSupre m e C ourt’ s de c ision in Padilla v . K e ntuc k y , 130 S. C t. 1473, 1486 (2010), C oom bs’ de fe nse attorne y

ha d no obliga

t ion to inform

him of the pote ntia l im

m igrat ion c onse q ue nc e s of his ple a

a gre e m e nt a

t tha t tim e . C haide z v . Unite d

State s , 133 S. C t. 1103, 1105 (2013) (holding tha t P adilla doe s not ha

ve re troa c tive e ffe c t be c a use it a nnounc e s a

ne w rule of la

w) . Se c ond, C oom

bs is subje c t to re m ova l be c a use he is a

n a lie n — n e ithe r a c itiz e n nor a nationa l

— c onvic te d of a n a g gravate d

fe lony . A c itiz e n of Ja

m a ic a , C oom bs none the le ss a

rgue s tha t he is a nationa l of the Unite d State s unde r the R om e Statute of the Inte rnat iona l C rim ina l C ourt (R om e Statute ) due to his c om m e n c e m e nt of the natura liz ation proc e ss a nd his se rvic e in the Unite d State s M arine C orps, for whic h he swore an oath of a lle gia nc e to this c ountry . The Unite d State s ne v e r ra tifie d, a

nd so is not le ga l ly

bound by , the R om e Statute ; thus, it a ffords no re lie f to C o om bs. Se e R om e Statute of the Inte rnat iona l C rim i na l C ourt, July

17, 1998, 2187 U.N.T.S. 90 (e n te re d into forc e July

1, 2002). Additiona lly , our pre c e de nt pre c lude s C o om bs’ se c ond c la im . He is not a nationa l, de spite his m i lita ry se rvic e , be c a

use he fa ile d to c om

ple te the natura liz ation proc e ss. Re y e s-Alc araz v . Ashc r oft, 363 F.3d 937, 940 (9th C ir.

32004) (re inforc ing Pe rdomo-Padilla by de c la ring tha t ne i the r se rvic e in the Unite d Stat e s m ilita

ry nor the ta

king of a n oath of a lle gia

nc e tra nsform s a n a lie n into a Unite d State s na t i ona l); Pe rdomo-Padilla v. Ashc r oft, 333 F.3d 964, 972 (9th C ir. 2003) (holding tha

t a n a lie n only

be c om e s a

nationa l through birth or c om ple tion of the natura liz at ion proc e ss). For the re a s ons se t forth a bove , C oom

bs is a n a lie n, a nd, in light of his a ggrav at e d fe lony

drug c onvic tion, he is re m ova b le without discre t ion. 8 U.S.C . §§ 1227(a )(2)(A)(iii), (B )(i). Pe tition for re vie w DISM ISSED in pa rt a nd DENIED in pa

rt.

4