Singh v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Iqbal SINGH, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 09-72231

391 Fed. Appx. 686

Submitted August 2, 2010. -- August 12, 2010

NOTICE:

PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

Before: KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, REINHARDT, Circuit Judge and WHYTE, District Judge.

Marie Kayal, Teresa Salazar-Cosmos, Attorney, Christopher John Stender, Esquire, Attorney, Immigration Practice Group, San Francisco, CA, for the petitioner. Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, San Francisco, CA; OIL, Daniel I. Smulow, Trial Attorney, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for the respondent.

OPINION

MEMORANDUM*

The BIA did not err in finding Singh removable because his robbery conviction under California Penal Code § 212.5(c) is a categorical crime of violence under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F). See Nieves-Medrano v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1057, 1057-58 (9th Cir. 2010).

Singh's removal to India moots his claim that he is entitled to protection from removal under the Convention Against Torture. See Hose v. INS, 180 F.3d 992, 996 (9th Cir. 1999) (en banc).

Even assuming that Singh's due process rights were violated when immigration officials failed to transport him to his state post-conviction relief hearing, he has failed to show that the violation "potentially . . . affect[ed] the outcome of the proceedings." Reyes-Melendez v. INS, 342 F.3d 1001, 1007 (9th Cir. 2003) (alteration and omission in original) (internal quotation marks omitted).

PETITION DENIED.

*This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.