Ramon Garcia-madrigal, Petitioner, v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, Respondent, 120 F.3d 268 (9th Cir. 1997)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit - 120 F.3d 268 (9th Cir. 1997)

Submitted July 22, 1997. **Decided July 24, 1997


MEMORANDUM* 

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Before: HUG, Chief Judge, KOZINSKI and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.


Petitioner Ramon Garcia-Madrigal is a 31-year-old Mexican national who entered the United States without inspection in 1986. He subsequently was granted lawful permanent resident status as a Special Agricultural Worker in 1990. After convictions for petty theft and second degree burglary, the Immigration and Naturalization Service commenced deportation proceedings against him.

Garcia-Madrigal sought a discretionary waiver of deportation pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c). The Immigration Judge denied Garcia-Madrigal's application. Garcia-Madrigal appealed his denial to the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA"). The BIA affirmed the denial. Garcia-Madrigal petitions us for review pro se. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a) and deny the petition.

* Because the government did not appoint counsel for him, Garcia-Madrigal argues that he was deprived of due process. Aliens have no right to appointed counsel at their deportation hearing. U.S. v. Cerda-Pena, 759 F.2d 1374, 1376 n. 2 (9th Cir. 1986).

II

Because Garcia-Madrigal appeals pro se, we read his papers liberally. See Masiano v. Wechsler, 940 F.2d 499, 501 n. 2 (9th Cir. 1991). To the extent that his petition addresses the merits of the BIA's denial of a discretionary waiver of deportation pursuant to § 1182(c), we review the BIA's decision for abuse of discretion. Ayala-Chavez v. INS, 944 F.2d 638, 642 (9th Cir. 1991). We may set aside the BIA's denial "only if the Board failed to support its conclusions with a reasoned explanation based upon legitimate concerns." Id.

The BIA considered the equities favoring Garcia-Madrigal, including his family ties, employment record and length of residence. The BIA balanced these factors against Garcia-Madrigal's criminal history, past incidents of domestic violence, and drug use. In light of our deferential review, we cannot say that the BIA abused its discretion.

PETITION DENIED

 **

The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 9th Cir. R. 34-4. The government's request for oral argument is denied

 *

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3