Mirna Argentina Baires- Hernandez v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

11-73494Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit28 dic 2012

Testo completo

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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
MIRNA ARGENTINA BAIRES-
HERNANDEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 11-73494
Agency No. A072-126-855
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 19, 2012**
Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.
Mirna Argentina Baires-Hernandez, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order
dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying her
FILED
DEC 28 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

11-73494 2
applications for relief from deportation. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1252. Reviewing for substantial evidence, Ramos v. INS, 246 F.3d 1264, 1266
(9th Cir. 2001), we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Baires-
Hernandez is statutorily barred from establishing the good moral character required
for suspension of deportation and voluntary departure because she voluntarily gave
false testimony under oath at an interview with an asylum officer in 2007 with the
subjective intent to obtain an immigration benefit. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)(6);
Ramos, 246 F.3d at 1266.
Baires-Hernandez’s contention that her false testimony was the result of
ineffective assistance of counsel provided by an immigration consultant she knew
was not a lawyer is foreclosed by our decision in Hernandez v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d
1014, 1020 (9th Cir. 2008) (holding that knowing reliance upon the advice of a
non-attorney cannot support a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel in a
removal proceeding).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.