Rohan Anthony Coombs v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROHAN ANTHONY COOMBS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72922
Agency No. A037-333-016
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted August 9, 2013
Pasadena, California
Before: TALLMAN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Rohan Anthony Coombs, a Jamaican citizen, petitions for review of a
decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing an appeal from an order
of removal entered by an immigration judge based upon a finding that Coombs is
an alien convicted in California state court of possession of marijuana with intent
to sell, an aggravated felony. Because (1) we lack jurisdiction to review his
FILED
AUG 16 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

-- 1 of 4 --

collateral attack upon his underlying state conviction and (2) neither his partial
completion of the naturalization process nor his military service conferred
nationality upon him, we DISMISS in part and DENY in part his petition for
review.
First, Coombs argues that his underlying 2008 California criminal
conviction was unconstitutional because his defense lawyer failed to inform him of
the immigration consequences of his plea agreement.1 We determine that we lack
jurisdiction to consider the merits of this claim because it functions as an
impermissible collateral attack upon his conviction. Lopez-Jacuinde v. Holder,
600 F.3d 1215, 1217 (9th Cir. 2010) (“[T]his Court retains jurisdiction to
determine its jurisdiction.”); Ramirez-Villalpando v. Holder, 645 F.3d 1035, 1041
(9th Cir. 2010) (holding that petitioner could not collaterally attack his state court
conviction on a petition for review of a BIA decision); Urbina-Mauricio v. INS,
989 F.2d 1085, 1089 (9th Cir. 1993).
1 We do not take judicial notice of Coombs’ California Superior Court
filings, including his unsuccessful petition for writ of error coram nobis, in light of
8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(A) and the fact that neither of the conditions in Fisher
allowing for the consideration of external evidence were met. See Fisher v. INS,
79 F.3d 955, 964 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc).
2

-- 2 of 4 --

Even if we had jurisdiction to consider this argument, Coombs would not
prevail. Because his 2008 conviction took place two years prior to the Supreme
Court’s decision in Padilla v. Kentucky, 130 S. Ct. 1473, 1486 (2010), Coombs’
defense attorney had no obligation to inform him of the potential immigration
consequences of his plea agreement at that time. Chaidez v. United States, 133 S.
Ct. 1103, 1105 (2013) (holding that Padilla does not have retroactive effect
because it announces a new rule of law).
Second, Coombs is subject to removal because he is an alien—neither a
citizen nor a national—convicted of an aggravated felony. A citizen of Jamaica,
Coombs nonetheless argues that he is a national of the United States under the
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute) due to his
commencement of the naturalization process and his service in the United States
Marine Corps, for which he swore an oath of allegiance to this country. The
United States never ratified, and so is not legally bound by, the Rome Statute; thus,
it affords no relief to Coombs. See Rome Statute of the International Criminal
Court, July 17, 1998, 2187 U.N.T.S. 90 (entered into force July 1, 2002).
Additionally, our precedent precludes Coombs’ second claim. He is not a
national, despite his military service, because he failed to complete the
naturalization process. Reyes-Alcaraz v. Ashcroft, 363 F.3d 937, 940 (9th Cir.
3

-- 3 of 4 --

2004) (reinforcing Perdomo-Padilla by declaring that neither service in the United
States military nor the taking of an oath of allegiance transforms an alien into a
United States national); Perdomo-Padilla v. Ashcroft, 333 F.3d 964, 972 (9th Cir.
2003) (holding that an alien only becomes a national through birth or completion
of the naturalization process).
For the reasons set forth above, Coombs is an alien, and, in light of his
aggravated felony drug conviction, he is removable without discretion. 8 U.S.C.
§§ 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), (B)(i).
Petition for review DISMISSED in part and DENIED in part.
4

-- 4 of 4 --