JOSE ARREDONDO GOMEZ V. JEFFERSON SESSIONS, No. 14-70430 (9th Cir. 2017)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS OCT 10 2017 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOSE JESUS ARREDONDO GOMEZ, AKA Jose Arredondo, AKA Jose Jesus Arredondo, AKA Jose Arredondo Gomez, AKA Jesus Gomez, AKA Jose Gomez, AKA Jose Ibarra, No. 14-70430 Agency No. A092-348-774 MEMORANDUM* Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 4, 2017** Pasadena, California Before: FERNANDEZ, RAWLINSON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges. * 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). Arredondo Gomez petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his appeal of an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order of removal. The IJ and the BIA did not err in relying on Arredondo Gomez’s admissions, made during the pleading stage of his removal hearing. See Perez-Mejia v. Holder, 663 F.3d 403, 410 (9th Cir. 2011). Arredondo Gomez admitted each of the allegations in the notice to appear, which alleged that he had been convicted of two controlled substance offenses involving methamphetamine. Because these admissions established Arredondo Gomez’s removability pursuant to INA § 237(a)(2)(B)(i), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), by clear and convincing evidence, we deny the petition for review, see 8 C.F.R. § 1240.10(c)-(d).1 PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 1 Arredondo Gomez challenges on appeal the IJ’s and the BIA’s reliance on the complaint in finding him removable. Even assuming Arredondo Gomez exhausted this issue before the BIA, the documents were properly considered by the IJ and the BIA as an alternative basis to confirm his removability. See Coronado v. Holder, 759 F.3d 977, 986 (9th Cir. 2014). 2

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.