MARIA ALICIA JUANA DURAN MARTINEZ, AKA Alicia Duran, AKA Juana Martinez v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIA ALICIA JUANA DURAN
MARTINEZ, AKA Alicia Duran, AKA
Juana Martinez,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 15-72975
Agency No. A200-306-002
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 8, 2017**
Before: LEAVY, W. FLETCHER, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.
Maria Alicia Juana Duran Martinez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from
an immigration judge’s order of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
FILED
MAR 15 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

§ 1252. We review de novo questions of law and for substantial evidence factual
findings. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny
the petition for review.
The agency correctly concluded that Duran Martinez was statutorily
ineligible for adjustment of status under 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i) because she is
inadmissible under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(C)(i)(I), where substantial evidence
supports the agency’s determination that she reentered the United States without
being admitted, after previously accruing more than one year of unlawful presence.
See Garfias-Rodriguez v. Holder, 702 F.3d 504, 513-14 (9th Cir. 2012) (en banc).
Contrary to Duran Martinez’s contention, the agency did not rely on her witness’s
testimony in making that determination.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
15-72975 2

-- 2 of 2 --