Case Name: Gregorio Reyes SALGADO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-06-06
Citations: 436 F. App'x 751
Docket Number: No. 09-73913
Parties: Gregorio Reyes SALGADO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 436
Pages: 751–751

Head Matter:
Gregorio Reyes SALGADO, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 09-73913.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted May 24, 2011.
Filed June 6, 2011.
Martin Zaehringer, Esq., Ventura, CA, for Petitioner.
Stefanie N. Hennes, Trial, Oil, DOJ-U.S. Department Of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office Of The Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.
Before: PREGERSON, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Gregorio Reyes Salgado, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Rendon v. Mukasey, 520 F.3d 967, 971 (9th Cir.2008), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency properly concluded that Sal-gado's conviction for possession of marijuana for sale in violation of California Health & Safety Code § 11359 constitutes an aggravated felony as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(B). See id. 975-76 (possession of a controlled substance with the intent to sell contains a trafficking element and is an aggravated felony). Salgado is therefore statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(3).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.