UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
January 25, 2011
RAMON RODRIGUEZ-OROZCO, PETITIONER,
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., ATTORNEY GENERAL, RESPONDENT.
Agency No. A092-216-096 On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
Submitted January 10, 2011*fn2
Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Ramon Rodriguez-Orozco, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review from a Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
We review de novo questions of law, Castillo-Cruz v. Holder, 581 F.3d 1154, 1158-59 (9th Cir. 2009), and we deny the petition for review.
The agency did not err in concluding that Rodriguez-Orozco is removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) based on his 2007 conviction for lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years of age in violation of Cal. Penal Code § 288(a). See United States v. Baron-Medina, 187 F.3d 1144, 1146-47 (9th Cir. 1999) ("The use of young children for the gratification of sexual desires constitutes an abuse.").
Rodriguez-Orozco's contention that United States v. Medina-Villa, 567 F.3d 507 (9th Cir. 2008), conflicts with Estrada-Espinoza v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc), is foreclosed. See United States v. Valencia-Barragan, 608 F.3d 1103, 1107 n.2 (9th Cir. 2010). Rodriguez-Orozco's contention that Nijhawan v. Holder, 129 S.Ct. 2294 (2009), effectively overruled Medina-Villa is unpersuasive.
In light of our disposition, we need not address whether Rodriguez-Orozco is also removable based on his 1987 conviction for violating Cal. Penal Code § 288(a).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.