Court Opinion

ID: 4676766
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-04-13 16:01:26.011284+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:02:18.550193
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 20-2904
                        ___________________________

                              Jose Luis Elias-Huinac

                                             Petitioner

                                        v.

              Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General of United States

                                         Respondent
                                  ____________

                      Petition for Review of an Order of the
                          Board of Immigration Appeals
                                  ____________

                            Submitted: April 08, 2021
                              Filed: April 13, 2021
                                  [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before COLLOTON, BENTON, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.
                          ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Guatemalan citizen Jose Luis Elias-Huinac petitions for review of an order of
the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his motion to reopen proceedings.
Having jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, this court finds no basis for reversal.
       This court concludes that Elias-Huinac’s due process claim is without merit.
See Alva-Arellano v. Lynch, 811 F.3d 1064, 1066 (8th Cir. 2016) (to establish due
process violation, noncitizen must demonstrate both fundamental procedural error,
and prejudice); Nunez-Portillo v. Holder, 763 F.3d 974, 977 (8th Cir. 2014) (no
constitutionally protected liberty interest in discretionary remedy of cancellation of
removal). The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Elias-Huinac’s untimely
motion to reopen. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)(7)(C)(i) (motion to reopen must be filed
within 90 days of entry of final order of removal); Vargas v. Holder, 567 F.3d 387,
391 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review).

      The petition is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
                       ______________________________

                                         -2-