Eduardo Diaz-Orozco v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
EDUARDO DIAZ-OROZCO et al,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General
Respondent.
No. 13-72986
Agency No. A092-289-391
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order
of the Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted January 16, 2015 **
San Francisco, California
Before: NOONAN and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges, and ADELMAN, District
Judge.***
Petitioner Eduardo Diaz-Orozco (“petitioner”) seeks review of a final order
from the Board of Immigration Appeals directing his removal to Mexico. See 8
U.S.C. § 1252(a). We deny the petition in part and dismiss it in part.
FILED
JAN 22 2015
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.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
*** The Honorable Lynn S. Adelman, District Judge for the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 2 --

The Board correctly determined that petitioner’s conviction of attempted
aggravated assault under Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-1203(A)(1), 13-1204(A)(2), & 13-
1001, qualifies as an aggravated felony/crime of violence under 8 U.S.C. §
1101(a)(43)(F). Attempted aggravated assault under Arizona law covers only
intentional conduct, United States v. Gomez-Hernandez, 680 F.3d 1171, 1176 (9th Cir.
2012), and this offense satisfies both prongs of 18 U.S.C. § 16. See United States v.
Cabrera-Perez, 751 F.3d 1000, 1007 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing United States v.
Ceron-Sanchez, 222 F.3d 1169, 1172-73 (9th Cir. 2000), overruled on other grounds,
Fernandez-Ruiz v. Gonzales, 466 F.3d 1121 (9th Cir. 2006)). We lack jurisdiction to
consider petitioner’s argument that the Board relied on incorrect factual
determinations in finding this offense a “particularly serious crime.” See Pechenkov
v. Holder, 705 F.3d 444, 448 (9th Cir. 2012). Finally, petitioner fails to show that the
record compels a finding in his favor on his claim under the Convention Against
Torture. See Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir. 2010)
(“Petitioners’ generalized evidence of violence and crime in Mexico is not particular
to Petitioners and is insufficient to meet this standard.”).
PETITION DENIED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART.
2

-- 2 of 2 --