T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J OS E AR MAND O MON R OY P E R DO MO, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 12- 70435 A ge nc yN o. A 088- 889- 834 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry11, 2013 ** B e f o r e : F E RN A N D E Z , T A S H I M A , a n dW A R D L A W , C ir c u it J u d g e s . Jose A rm ando M on roy- P er do m o, a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f E l S al vado r, pet i t i on s f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di s m i s s i ng hi s appe a l f

r om a n i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s ( “ I J ” ) r e m ova l or de r . W e ha ve 

# FI LED FEB 14 2 013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS12- 70435 2 j uri sdi ct i on un der 8 U . S . C . § 1 25 2. W e r evi ew de no vo const i tut i on al chal l enges to r e m o v a l o r d e r s , L op ez -R odri gu ezv. Mukasey , 53 6 F . 3d 10 12 , 10 15 (9th C i r. 2008) , a nd r e vi e w f

orabus e of

di s c r e t i on the de ni a l of am ot i on t o r e m a nd, Mo vs is ia n v . A s h c r o

ft , 395 F . 3d 1095, 1098 ( 9th C i r . 2005) . W e de nythe pe t i t i on f o rr e v ie w . E v en as su m in g th at th e a ll eg ed ly u n law fu l sea rc h o f M o n ro y- P er d o m o ’s re si dence and hi s s ub se qu entarre stw as an egregi ou s vi ol at i on of hi s c on st i tut i on al r i ght s , the a ge nc ydi d note rri n c onc l udi ng tha tthe r e w a s s ubs t ant i a l i nde pe nde nt evi dence i n the re cord t o est abl i sh thathe w as no nethel es s s ubj ec tt o rem ov al as c h a r g e d . Se e H

o o n s i la p a v . I NS , 5 7 5 F .2 d7 3 5 , 7 3 8 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 7 8 ) , m odi f i e d by 5 8 6 F .2 d 7 5 5 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 7 8 ) ( “[ T ]h e m e r e f a c t th a t aF o u rth A m e n d m e n t ille g a lity di re ct s a tt ent i on t o a part i cul arsuspec tdo es no tre qu i re excl usi on of evi dence subsequent l y unearthed from i nd ependentsource s. ”) T he B I A di d notabus e i t s di s c r e t i on i n de ny i ng M onr oy - P e r dom o’ s m ot i on to r e m a n d to ap p lyf

o rv o lu n ta ryd e p a rtu r e , w h e r e h e h a dth e o p p o rtu n ityto ap p ly f orvol unt a ryde pa rtur e be f or e the I Ja nd he di d notc l a i m tha ti ne f f e c t i ve a s s is ta n c e o f

c o u n s e l p r e v e n te d h im f r o m ap p ly in g . See 8 C . F . R . § 1 00 3. 2(c) (1); M a g a l la n e s -D a m i a n v . I

NS , 78 3 F . 2d 93 1, 93 4 (9th C i r. 19 86 ) ( “ pet i t i on er s are12- 70435 3 ge ne r a l l ybound bythe c onduc tof the i ra tt orne y s , i nc l udi ng a dm i s s i ons m a de by them , abse ntegre gi ou s c i rc um st ance s. ”) P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.