Armando Lazo Chavez 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NOT FOR PUBLICATION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
ARMANDO LAZO CHAVEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 08-73442
Agency No. A078-979-398
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 19, 2010**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Armando Lazo Chavez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his motion to continue proceedings.
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the
FILED
OCT 25 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

08-73442 2
denial of a motion to continue, and review de novo claims of constitutional
violations in immigration proceedings. Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey, 526 F.3d 1243,
1246 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Lazo Chavez’s request
for a continuance where he did not demonstrate good cause. See 8 C.F.R. §
1003.29 (an IJ may grant a motion for continuance for good cause shown); see also
Baires v. INS, 856 F.2d 89, 92 (9th Cir. 1988).
Lazo Chavez’s due process claim fails because he cannot demonstrate error.
See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 2000) (requiring error for a
petitioner to prevail on a due process claim).
Lazo Chavez’s remaining claims are not persuasive.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --