BERNARDO PERFECTO-CORNELIO V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 10-72363 (9th Cir. 2012)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED MAR 01 2012 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT BERNARDO PERFECTO-CORNELIO, Petitioner, No. 10-72363 Agency No. A093-237-450 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals February 21, 2012 ** Before: FERNANDEZ, McKEOWN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges. Bernardo Perfecto-Cornelio, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order denying his motion to reopen based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). reopen. Mohammed v. Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Perfecto-Cornelio s motion to reopen because he presented insufficient evidence to establish prejudice. See Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (to prevail on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, petitioner must demonstrate prejudice). We lack jurisdiction to review Perfecto-Cornelio s remaining contentions because he failed to exhaust these issues before the BIA. Zara v. Ashcroft, 383 F.3d 927, 930-31 (9th Cir. 2004) ( A petitioner cannot satisfy the exhaustion requirement by making a general challenge to the IJ s decision, but, rather, must specify which issues form the basis of the appeal. ) PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 2 10-72363

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.