Yamal Gabrie, a.k.a. Gabriel Yamal 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
YAMAL GABRIE, a.k.a. Gabriel Yamal,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72612
Agency No. A072-227-886
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted September 27, 2011**
Before: SILVERMAN, W. FLETCHER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Yamal Gabrie, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions pro se for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his applications for cancellation of
removal and voluntary departure. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
FILED
OCT 7 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

10-72612 2
We review de novo questions of law, Sinotes-Cruz v. Gonzales, 468 F.3d 1190,
1194 (9th Cir. 2006), and review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to
continue, Ahmed v. Holder, 569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We deny the
petition for the review.
In his opening brief, Gabrie fails to address, and therefore has waived any
challenge to, the BIA’s dispositive determination that Gabrie was bound by his
former counsel’s admissions before the IJ that Gabrie’s criminal convictions were
crimes involving moral turpitude. See Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256,
1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996) (issues not specifically raised and argued in a party’s
opening brief are waived).
The agency therefore did not err in denying Gabrie’s applications for
cancellation of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(B), and voluntary departure
under 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(b)(1)(B), because he was unable to show good moral
character during the relevant time period preceding his applications. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1101(f)(3); Matter of Deanda-Romo, 23 I. & N. Dec. 597, 599 (BIA 2003)
(individual who has committed more than one crime involving moral turpitude is
not eligible for the petty offense exception).
The IJ did not abuse her discretion in denying Gabrie’s request for a
continuance where Gabrie failed to show good cause. See Ahmed, 569 F.3d at

-- 2 of 3 --

10-72612 3
1012-15; 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29. It follows that Gabrie’s due process claim fails. See
Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 3 of 3 --