Hilda Juan Martinez 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.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
HILDA JUAN MARTINEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-71550
Agency No. A096-339-714
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 10, 2010**
Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges .
Hilda Juan Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to
reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have
FILED
SEP 01 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-71550 2
jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of
a motion to reopen, and review de novo constitutional questions, including claims
of ineffective assistance of counsel. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-
92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Martinez’s motion to reopen
because she failed to establish that her former attorney’s alleged ineffective
assistance resulted in prejudice. See id. at 793-94 (to prevail on an ineffective
assistance of counsel claim, a petitioner must demonstrate prejudice).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --