Case: 18-10185 Date Filed: 11/27/2018 Page: 1 of 8 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 18-10185 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A021-148-528 IVAN ERIC LINTON, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (November 27, 2018) Before MARTIN, ROSENBAUM, and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 18-10185 Date Filed: 11/27/2018 Page: 2 of 8 Ivan Eric Linton petitions this Court for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) denials of his fifth and seventh 1 motions to reopen his removal proceedings. After careful review, we dismiss the petition. I. Linton, a native and citizen of Jamaica, came to the United States in 1979 and became a lawful permanent resident that year. In 1983, Linton pled guilty to possession of marijuana, for which he was sentenced to five years of probation. Six years later, Linton was convicted at trial of conspiracy to possess cocaine and attempted trafficking in cocaine. He was again sentenced to five years of probation. In light of these convictions, in 2005 the Department of Homeland Security served Linton with a Notice to Appear, which charged him with removability under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). See 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) (“Any alien who is convicted of an aggravated felony at any time after admission is deportable.”); id. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) (same for certain controlled substance violations). At his removal hearing, Linton admitted the 1 Linton styled what we are calling his seventh motion as a “motion to accept supplemental evidence out of time and to remand.” The BIA denied the motion, whether treated as a supplement requesting reconsideration of Linton’s already-rejected sixth motion to reopen or as a seventh motion to reopen. To avoid confusion, we refer to it as Linton’s seventh motion to reopen. 2 Case: 18-10185 Date Filed: 11/27/2018 Page: 3 of 8 allegations in the Notice to Appear and conceded removability. However, he applied for a waiver of deportation under former INA § 212(c). 2 See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c) (1994). The Immigration Judge deemed Linton ineligible for a § 212(c) waiver and denied his application. The BIA later upheld the denial, as did this Court. On April 6, 2011, Linton was removed to Jamaica where he still lives. Linton filed a series of motions to reopen his removal proceedings, asserting his eligibility for § 212(c) relief. Linton also submitted an “application for asylum and withholding of removal,” which the BIA treated as a motion to reopen and labelled as Linton’s fifth such motion. The BIA denied each of Linton’s motions. In June 2015, Linton petitioned this Court for review of the BIA’s denials of his fifth and sixth motions to reopen. See Linton v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 680 F. App’x 848, 851 (11th Cir. 2017) (per curiam) (unpublished). Our Court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of Linton’s sixth motion. See id. at 851–52. However, we found jurisdiction ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals