Lanre v. Holder

Filing 920090306

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
No. 08-60391 Summary Calendar March 6, 2009 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk

MAXWELL LANRE, also known as Alaba Olanrewaju Petitioner v. ERIC H HOLDER, JR, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A79 003 838

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Maxwell Lanre, whose true name is Alaba Olanrewaju, petitions this court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals's (BIA) order denying his ineffective assistance of counsel claim and affirming the Immigration Judge's (IJ) denial of his request for a continuance. Olanrewaju sought a continuance of his removal proceedings pending the adjudication of his wife's I-130 petition, which was filed in order for Olanrewaju

Pursuant to 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR. R. 47.5.4.

*

No. 08-60391 to seek an adjustment of status. The grant of a motion to continue lies within the sound discretion of the IJ, who may grant the motion for good cause shown. Masih v. Mukasey, 536 F.3d 370, 373 (5th Cir. 2008); see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.29. Olanrewaju has failed to show good cause for a continuance because receipt of the pending I-130 petition was only the first step in the long and discretionary process of obtaining an adjustment of status. See Ahmed v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 433, 438-39 (5th Cir. 2006). Thus, the BIA did not abuse its discretion by affirming the IJ's denial of the motion for continuance. Olanrewaju also argues that the BIA erred in denying his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, reiterating his claim that his former attorney's bad advice coerced him into his "bad behavior" and set him "on a trail of misrepresentations." The BIA's finding that Olanrewaju willingly and actively participated in the scheme to misrepresent himself during his immigration proceedings is supported by substantial evidence. See Lopez-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 263 F.3d 442, 444 (5th Cir. 2001). Thus, Olanrewaju's argument in support of his claim of ineffectiveness is without merit. The petition for review is DENIED.

2