NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT __________ No. 21-3154 __________ DEURI ALONSO BURGOS, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES __________ On Appeal from the Board of Immigration Appeals On Petitions for Review of Orders of the Board of Immigration Appeals (A058-719-336) Immigration Judge: Alice Song Hartye __________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) on December 13, 2022 Before: RESTREPO, MCKEE, SMITH, Circuit Judges (Filed: April 21, 2023) __________ OPINION* __________ * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. RESTREPO, Circuit Judge. In 2021, the United States Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) com- menced removal proceedings against Mr. Deuri Alonso Burgos (“Alonso”). DHS alleged that, based on his two controlled substance convictions, Alonso was deportable. After a hearing, the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) granted Alonso’s request for cancellation of re- moval. DHS appealed the IJ’s decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). The BIA sustained DHS’s appeal and ordered Alonso’s removal to the Dominican Re- public. Alonso filed a petition for review alleging that the BIA engaged in impermissible factfinding when reaching its decision. We will deny the petition for review. I. BACKGROUND In April 2021, DHS commenced removal proceedings against Alonso by filing a Notice to Appear at the York, Pennsylvania, immigration court. The Notice to Appear contained eight factual allegations against Alonso: (1) he was not a citizen or national of the United States, (2) he was a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic, (3) he had been admitted to the United States as a lawful permanent resident in February 2008, (4) he was convicted for possession with the intent to distribute a controlled substance in the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas for Berks County in November 2020, (5) on the same date and before the same court, he was convicted of conspiracy to commit posses- sion with the intent to distribute a controlled substance, (6) he was sentenced to five years’ probation, (7) on the same date and before the same court he was also convicted of possession with the intent to distribute a controlled substance, and finally, (8) he was sentenced to twenty-three months of confinement. 2 Seeking relief from removal, Alonso filed an application for cancellation of re- moval for certain permanent residents under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a), which required him to demonstrate that he has been lawfully admitted for permanent residence for not less than five years, that he has resided in the United States continuously for seven years after hav- ing been admitted in any status, that he has not been convicted of an aggravated felony, and that he warrants relief as a matter of discretion. See Matter of C-V-T-, 22 I. & N. Dec. 7, 10 (BIA 1998). In the May 2021 hearing, the IJ found that Alonso testified credibly and that he met his burden of proving statutory eligibility for cancellation of removal.1 In consider- ing whether Alonso warranted a favorable …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals