PEDRO TRUJILLO-RODRIGUEZ V. WILLIAM BARR, No. 18-72625 (9th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED FEB 6 2020 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT PEDRO TRUJILLO-RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 18-72625 Agency No. A205-054-215 v. MEMORANDUM* WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted February 4, 2020** Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges. Pedro Trujillo-Rodriguez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. * 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). 2008). We deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that TrujilloRodriguez cannot establish the requisite ten years of continuous physical presence for cancellation of removal, where a signed Form I-826 from 2011 indicates that he accepted voluntary return in lieu of appearing before an immigration judge. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A); Gutierrez v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 1114, 1117-18 (9th Cir. 2008) (a voluntary departure breaks continuous physical presence, but the record must contain some evidence that the alien was informed of and accepted the terms of the voluntary departure agreement). Trujillo-Rodriguez’s contention that his acceptance of voluntary return was not knowing and voluntary is not supported by the record. See Valadez-Munoz v. Holder, 623 F.3d 1304, 1312 (9th Cir. 2010) (voluntary departure was accepted “knowingly and voluntarily” where applicant chose voluntary departure and signed document expressly waiving his right to appear before an immigration judge). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 18-72625
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.
