Paul T. Coleman 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).
IH/Research
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
PAUL T. COLEMAN,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-72259
Agency No. A036-459-449
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Department of Homeland Security
Submitted February 16, 2010**
Before: FERNANDEZ, GOULD, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Paul T. Coleman, a native and citizen of Belize, petitions for review of the
Department of Homeland Security’s order reinstating his 1994 deportation order
under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(a)(5). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
FILED
FEB 26 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

IH/Research 07-72259 2
review de novo due process claims and questions of law, Garcia de Rincon v.
Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 539 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the
petition for review.
Because Coleman failed to demonstrate a gross miscarriage of justice in his
initial deportation proceeding, he may not at this point collaterally attack his 1994
deportation order. See id. at 1137-38 (while a petitioner is generally prevented
from collaterally attacking an underlying removal order on constitutional due
process grounds, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) permits some measure of review if the
petitioner can demonstrate a “gross miscarriage of justice” in the prior
proceedings).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --