Hector Roberto Parada- Chicas v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HECTOR ROBERTO PARADA-
CHICAS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 05-72971
Agency No. A024-954-831
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted November 1, 2010
Pasadena, California
Before: SCHROEDER, TALLMAN and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Hector Roberto Parada-Chicas, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision dismissing his
appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of petitioner’s applications for
an Immigration and Naturalization Act (“INA”) § 212(c) waiver, an INA § 212(h)
FILED
NOV 09 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2
waiver, and adjustment of status. He was ordered removed on the basis of his
California conviction for possession of cocaine for sale and his prior California
conviction for assault with a firearm. His case was originally considered by the IJ
in 1997 and remanded by the BIA for reasons not relevant here. He now attempts
to challenge the use of certain conviction documents admitted in the original, July
1997 hearing. The documents were admitted into evidence at the earlier hearing
without objection and, hence, were properly relied upon by the government in the
second hearing. We therefore deny the petition for review of that issue.
Parada-Chicas’s claims that the immigration court violated his due process
rights were never raised to the BIA. Because they were not exhausted, we lack
jurisdiction to review them. Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677–78 (9th Cir.
2004).
In its review of the IJ’s decision, the BIA not only adopted it, but added an
additional reason why the petitioner is ineligible for the relief he seeks. The
petitioner’s conviction for assault with a firearm is an aggravated felony crime of
violence. United States v. Moriel-Luna, 585 F.3d 1191, 1200–01 (9th Cir. 2009).
Because he has been convicted of a crime of violence, there is no statutory
counterpart for inadmissibility to the ground on which he was ordered removed.
Id. Hence, he is barred from relief under the statutory counterpart rule. Id. at

-- 2 of 3 --

3
1201–02. Petitioner has not challenged the BIA’s reliance on that ground in his
briefs to us.
The petition for review is therefore DENIED in part and DISMISSED in
part for lack of jurisdiction.

-- 3 of 3 --