JUAN AGUIRRE-SANDOVAL V. JEFFERSON SESSIONS, No. 12-70507 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED JUL 5 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUAN CARLOS AGUIRRE-SANDOVAL, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 12-70507 Agency No. A077-060-254 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted June 26, 2017** Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges. Juan Carlos Aguirre-Sandoval, 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 suppress evidence and terminate removal proceedings, and ordering him removed. Our jurisdiction is * 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). governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law. MartinezMedina v. Holder, 673 F.3d 1029, 1033 (9th Cir. 2011). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. The agency did not err in denying Aguirre-Sandoval’s motion to suppress or terminate proceedings, or in sustaining the charge of inadmissibility, because Samayoa-Martinez v. Holder, 558 F.3d 897, 901-02 (9th Cir. 2009), forecloses his contention that his statements to immigration officials at the border were obtained in violation of 8 C.F.R. § 287.3(c). Aguirre-Sandoval urges us to reconsider our holding in Samayoa-Martinez, but a three-judge panel cannot overrule circuit precedent in the absence of an intervening decision from a higher court or en banc decision of this court. See Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 677 (9th Cir. 2011). We also reject Aguirre-Sandoval’s contention that de Rodriguez-Echeverria v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2008) controls the result of his case. We lack jurisdiction to consider Aguirre-Sandoval’s unexhausted contentions regarding service of the list of legal service providers or errors in the government’s evidence, including the Form I-213, Record of Inadmissible/Deportable Alien and D-166, Report of Investigation. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 2 12-70507

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.