Tomas Mota Orozco v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
TOMAS MOTA OROZCO,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 21-187
Agency No.
A203-142-733
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 26, 2023**
Before: CANBY, S.R. THOMAS, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
Tomas Mota Orozco, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from
an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of
removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo
questions of law. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir.
* 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).
FILED
JUL 3 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 21-187
2005). We deny the petition for review.
The BIA properly denied cancellation of removal where the record is
inconclusive as to whether Orozco was convicted under Cal. Penal Code
§ 273.5(a) and Orozco thus failed to meet his burden of proof to establish that
he was not convicted of a crime of domestic violence. See Pereida v.
Wilkinson, 141 S. Ct. 754, 761(2001) (an inconclusive conviction record is
insufficient to meet applicant’s burden of proof to show eligibility for relief);
Valdez v. Garland, 28 F.4th 72, 78 (9th Cir. 2022) (conviction under Cal. Penal
Code § 273.5(a) is categorically a crime of domestic violence). Orozco’s
contention that Pereida is distinguishable is unavailing. See Marinelarena v.
Garland, 6 F.4th 975, 977 (9th Cir. 2021) (“burden of proof [is] on an applicant
for immigration relief to show the absence of a disqualifying conviction”).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --