Case Name: Jose Velasco HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-01-24
Citations: 553 F. App'x 708
Docket Number: No. 12-71954
Parties: Jose Velasco HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 553
Pages: 708–709

Head Matter:
Jose Velasco HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 12-71954.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Jan. 21, 2014.
Filed Jan. 24, 2014.
Mario Acosta, Jr., Esquire, Law Offices of Mario Acosta, Jr., Los Angeles, CA, for Petitioner.
Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Andrew Nathan O’Malley, Trial, Oil, Ernesto Horacio Molina, Jr., Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, 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
Jose Velasco Hernandez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. Reviewing de novo questions of law, Renteria-Morales v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 1076, 1081 (9th Cir.2008), we deny the petition for review.
The BIA correctly concluded that Velas-co Hernandez's conviction for assault with a deadly weapon under California Penal Code § 245(a)(1) constitutes an aggravated-felony crime of violence that renders him removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) because section 245(a)(1) defines a categorical crime of violence, and Velasco Hernandez received an actual sentence to imprisonment of at least one year. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F) (defining an "aggravated felony" as "a crime of violence . for which the term of imprisonment [is] at least one year"); United States v. Grajeda, 581 F.3d 1186, 1197 (9th Cir.2009) ("[A]ssault with a deadly weapon or by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury under section 245(a)(1) is categorically a crime of violence . "); Renteria-Morales, 551 F.3d at 1089 ("[The] language in § 1101(a)(43) requiring that a crime of conviction be one 'for which the term of imprisonment is at least one year' . refers to the actual sentence imposed by the judge on the defendant convicted of the predicate offense, rather than the 'potential sentence that the judge could have imposed.' " (citation omitted)).
Our case law forecloses Velasco Hernandez's contentions that section 245(a)(1) does not contain the mens rea required for a crime of violence and that California law's classification of his offense as a misdemeanor prevents it from qualifying as an aggravated-felony crime of violence under federal law. See Grajeda, 581 F.3d at 1197 ("[A]ssault under California Penal Code section 245(a) requires proof of sufficiently intentional conduct to satisfy the mens rea requirement for a crime of violence."); Habibi v. Holder, 673 F.3d 1082, 1088 (9th Cir.2011) ("[Wjhether a state classifies an offense as a 'misdemeanor' is irrelevant to determining whether it is an 'aggravated felony' for purposes of federal law.").
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.