Erika Perez-Macedo v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [10-60080 Affirmed ] Judge: TMR , Judge: JLD , Judge: EBC Mandate pull date is 02/10/2011 [10-60080]

Erika Perez-MacedoCaEric Holder, Jr. v. se: 10-60080

Document: 00511327254 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/20/2010

Doc. 0

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED
N o . 10-60080 S u m m a r y Calendar December 20, 2010 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk

E R I K A PEREZ-MACEDO, P e titio n e r v. E R I C H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, R espon dent

P e tit io n for Review of an Order of the B o a r d of Immigration Appeals B I A No. A099 616 091

B e fo r e REAVLEY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. P E R CURIAM:* E r ik a Perez-Macedo, a native and citizen of Mexico, has filed a petition for r e v ie w from the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying her m o t io n to reopen. She contends that the BIA erred in determining that she did n o t receive ineffective assistance of counsel with respect to her application for c a n c e lla t io n of removal. According to Perez-Macedo, her ineffective assistance c la im was cognizable because she had a due process right under the Fifth A m e n d m e n t to a fair hearing in her immigration proceedings.
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
*

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 10-60080 Document: 00511327254 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/20/2010 No. 10-60080 " [D ]is c r e t io n a r y relief from removal . . . is not a liberty or property right t h a t requires due process protection." Ahmed v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 433, 440 (5th C ir . 2006); accord Assaad v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 471, 475 (5th Cir. 2004). "[W]hen t h e r e is no due process right to the ultimate relief sought, there is no due process r ig h t to effective assistance of counsel in pursuit of that relief." Because

G u t i e r r e z -M o r a le s v. Homan, 461 F.3d 605, 609 (5th Cir. 2006).

c a n c e lla t io n of removal is a form of discretionary relief from removal, see 8 U .S .C . § 1229b; Nieto Hernandez v. Holder, 592 F.3d 681, 683 (5th Cir. 2009), P e r e z -M a c e d o cannot establish a due process claim for ineffective assistance of c o u n s e l in pursuing that relief. See Gutierrez-Morales, 461 F.3d at 609. T h e petition for review is DENIED.

2