Yevgeniy Valentinovic Leshchinkiy, a.k.a. Vadim V. Leshchinskiy, a.k.a. Yevgeniy V.… 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
YEVGENIY VALENTINOVIC
LESHCHINKIY, a.k.a. Vadim V.
Leshchinskiy, a.k.a. Yevgeniy V.
Leshchinskiy, a.k.a. Eugene V. Leshinsky,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-71903
Agency No. A071-280-443
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted July 24, 2013**
Before: ALARCÓN, CLIFTON, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Yevgeniy Valentinovic Leshchinkiy, a native and citizen of Ukraine,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. Our jurisdiction is governed
FILED
JUL 31 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-71903 2
by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We dismiss in
part and deny in part the petition for review.
Leshchinkiy does not challenge that his 2007 conviction for burglary in the
second degree in violation of R.C.W. § 9A.52.030 is an aggravated felony burglary
offense that renders him removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii). The
aggravated felony conviction also renders Leshchinkiy statutorily ineligible for
asylum. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii), (B)(i).
Because Leshchinkiy was convicted of an aggravated felony and has not
raised a colorable legal challenge, we lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s
discretionary determination that his conviction is a particularly serious crime that
bars him from receiving withholding of removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C)
(limiting review when petitioner has been convicted of an aggravated felony); see
also Pechenkov v. Holder, 705 F.3d 444, 447-49 (9th Cir. 2012).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of protection under the
Convention Against Torture because Leshchinkiy failed to establish that it is more
likely than not he will be tortured if returned to Ukraine. See Wakkary, 558 F.3d at
1067-68; see also Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.

-- 2 of 2 --