Jose Eduardo Esquivel-Mateo v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE EDUARDO ESQUIVEL-MATEO,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 16-73952
Agency No. A200-686-403
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 15, 2018**
Before: FARRIS, BYBEE, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Jose Eduardo Esquivel-Mateo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision finding him inadmissible and denying his application
for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We
* 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
AUG 20 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 16-73952
review for substantial evidence the agency’s “reason to believe” determination and
we review de novo questions of law. Chavez-Reyes v. Holder, 741 F.3d 1, 3 (9th
Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that there was
“reason to believe” Esquivel-Mateo had knowingly assisted in drug trafficking,
where the declaration of probable cause formed the factual basis for Esquivel-
Mateo’s plea and reflects his involvement in the purchase of controlled narcotics,
during which multiple suspects were arrested and 518.5 grams of cocaine and
523.6 grams of methamphetamine were seized. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(C)(i)
(providing that an individual is inadmissible if there is “reason to believe” that he
has knowingly assisted in the illicit trafficking of a controlled substance); Chavez-
Reyes, 741 F.3d at 2-3; Suazo Perez v. Mukasey, 512 F.3d 1222, 1226-27 (9th Cir.
2008) (an immigration judge may rely upon a statement of probable cause supplied
by the prosecution to establish a factual basis for the plea).
Accordingly, the agency did not err in finding Esquivel-Mateo inadmissible
under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(C)(i). Nor did it err in finding him ineligible for
cancellation of removal. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(f)(3), 1229b(b)(1)(A).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --