Benito Sanchez-Garcia v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 14-1256 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1256 BENITO SANCHEZ-GARCIA, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: October 8, 2014 Decided: October 20, 2014 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Arturo H. Hernandez, Sterling, Virginia, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General, Nancy Friedman, Senior Litigation Counsel, Margaret A. O Donnell, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Benito Sanchez-Garcia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( Board ) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge s denial of his requests for cancellation of removal and voluntary departure. and the Board s conclusion that We have reviewed the administrative record order an alien find Sanchez-Garcia both forms of relief. that and shall is no error in statutorily the Board s ineligible for See 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(c) (2012) (providing not be permitted to depart voluntarily . . . if the alien was previously permitted to so depart after having been found inadmissible under [8 U.S.C. §] 1182(a)(6)(A) [2012]); Garcia v. Holder, 732 F.3d 308 (4th Cir. 2013) (holding that Board s ruling that alien s continuous physical presence terminated when he voluntarily departed country was a reasonable interpretation of 8 U.S.C. § 1229b (2012)). We therefore deny reasons stated by the Board. Feb. 21, 2014). facts and materials legal before the petition for review for the See In re: Sanchez-Garcia (B.I.A. We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 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.