Jorge Lopez-Lara 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
JORGE LOPEZ-LARA,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 10-72067
Agency No. A091-717-190
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 21, 2011**
Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.
Jorge Lopez-Lara, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions pro se for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an immigration
judge’s removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de
FILED
NOV 22 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

10-72067 2
novo questions of law, Renteria-Morales v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 1076, 1080 (9th
Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency correctly applied the modified categorical approach to determine
that Lopez-Lara’s 2006 conviction for petty theft with a prior, in violation of Cal.
Penal Code §§ 484 and 666, constituted an aggravated felony theft offense under
8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G). See United States v. Rivera, 658 F.3d 1073, 1077 (9th
Cir. 2011) (generic crime of theft is “a taking of property or an exercise of control
over property without consent with the criminal intent to deprive the owner of
rights and benefits of ownership, even if such deprivation is less than total or
permanent”) (alterations and citations omitted); id. at 1076 (where defendant
receives sentence of at least one year, inclusive of sentencing enhancement, “petty
theft convictions under Cal. Penal Code §§ 484(a) and 666 satisfy the ‘at least one
year’ sentence requirement of 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G)”). Lopez-Lara therefore
is removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), and ineligible for cancellation of
removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(3).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --