Santa Villanueva Guerrero v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A045-739-848. Mailed to: Santa Villanueva Guerrero. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999483088].. [14-1744]

Appeal: 14-1744

Doc: 14

Filed: 11/26/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1744

SANTA ESPERANZA VILLANUEVA GUERRERO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.

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

Submitted:

November 14, 2014

Decided:

November 26, 2014

Before SHEDD, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Santa Esperanza Villanueva Guerrero, Petitioner Pro Se. Michael
Christopher Heyse, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-1744

Doc: 14

Filed: 11/26/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Santa

Esperanza

Villanueva

Guerrero,

a

native

and

citizen of the Dominican Republic, petitions for review of an
order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing
her

appeal

removable.

from

the

immigration

judge’s

order

finding

her

We deny the petition for review.
In her pro se informal brief, Guerrero contends her

counsel was ineffective and that her removal would be an extreme
hardship to her children.

Because she does not challenge the

Board’s conclusion that she was removable, the issue is waived.
See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).

Guerrero’s issues in her informal brief

were not raised on appeal to the Board.

Because she failed to

exhaust the issues, we are without jurisdiction to review them.
See Asika v. Ashcroft, 362 F.3d 264, 267 n.3 (4th Cir. 2004).
Accordingly,
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

we

deny

argument

adequately

the

petition

because

presented

in

the
the

for
facts

review.

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court, and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

2