USCA11 Case: 19-15080 Date Filed: 09/09/2021 Page: 1 of 24 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 19-15080 ________________________ Agency No. A076-485-882 ALFREDO NICOLAS TALAMANTES-ENRIQUEZ, a.k.a. Alfredo Talamantes, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (September 9, 2021) Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM, and ED CARNES, Circuit Judges. ED CARNES, Circuit Judge: Alfredo Talamantes-Enriquez petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge’s removal order. That order was based on the IJ’s determination that he is ineligible USCA11 Case: 19-15080 Date Filed: 09/09/2021 Page: 2 of 24 for cancellation of removal because he has been convicted of an “aggravated felony” as the Immigration and Naturalization Act defines the term. I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Talamantes is a native and citizen of Mexico who entered the United States without inspection in 1994. In 2017 the Department of Homeland Security finally initiated removal proceedings against him. After a variety of proceedings that don’t matter to the issue raised in this appeal, the question of whether Talamantes would be removed came down to whether he had been convicted of an “aggravated felony” as the INA defines that term. On that issue, the IJ had before him the “accusation” and “final disposition” for each of two Georgia simple battery convictions. The first one was from February 2001. The accusation that led to the conviction charged Talamantes with simple battery under “O.C.G.A. Section 16-5-23,” alleging that he had “cause[d] physical harm to [two women] by striking them in the face.” After pleading nolo contendere, Talamantes was convicted and “sentenced to confinement for a period of 12 mo[nth]s,” which he was allowed to serve on probation. The sentence order stated if Talamantes violated the terms of probation the state court could revoke probation and “order the execution” of the original sentence of confinement. The second conviction was from April 2001. The accusation that led to it charged Talamantes with simple battery under “O.C.G.A. Section 16-5-23,” 2 USCA11 Case: 19-15080 Date Filed: 09/09/2021 Page: 3 of 24 alleging that he “cause[d] physical harm to [a woman] by throwing books at her and leaving visible scratches on her arm.” After pleading guilty, he was convicted and “sentenced to confinement for a period of 12 mo[nth]s,” which he was allowed to serve on probation. The sentence order stated if Talamantes violated the terms of probation the state court could revoke probation and “order the execution” of the original sentence of confinement. Just like the sentence order had in the first case. Talamantes applied for cancellation of removal, among other relief. The IJ denied his application and ordered him removed based on the two Georgia battery convictions. It determined that both of them were aggravated felonies under the INA because they met the components of the applicable statutory definition: the convictions were for a crime of violence and, for each, Talamantes had been sentenced …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals