Case: 20-10682 Date Filed: 08/28/2020 Page: 1 of 4 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 20-10682 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A208-919-216 RODENEY FAUSTIN, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (August 28, 2020) Before NEWSOM, BRANCH, and LUCK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Rodeney Faustin petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s denial of his motion to reconsider its decision to dismiss his appeal as untimely. We deny his petition. Case: 20-10682 Date Filed: 08/28/2020 Page: 2 of 4 Faustin, a native and citizen of Haiti, was paroled into the United States in February 2016. In June 2016, the government served him with a notice to appear, alleging that he was removable because he did not possess valid entry or travel documents. A few months later, Faustin applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture, claiming that he was persecuted in Haiti for his political affiliation. An immigration judge held a hearing on October 16, 2018, denied Faustin’s applications, and ordered that he be removed to Haiti. The written order told Faustin that he had the right to appeal and that his appeal was due by November 15, 2018. The order was mailed to Faustin’s attorney on October 17, 2018. The board received Faustin’s notice of appeal on May 2, 2019. Faustin asked the board to accept his late appeal, explaining in an affidavit that he tried in good faith to file his appeal before the deadline but failed to do so because he was unemployed, had “extreme financial hardship,” and could not find an attorney for a reasonable fee. The board dismissed Faustin’s appeal as untimely, finding that the statements in his affidavit were insufficient for the board to consider his appeal. On September 12, 2019, Faustin moved the board to reconsider its dismissal. He argued that his former counsel was ineffective and attached an affidavit that said he paid an attorney to file his appeal but that the attorney had failed to do so. Attached to the affidavit was a copy of a receipt for a $400 money order for 2 Case: 20-10682 Date Filed: 08/28/2020 Page: 3 of 4 “Immigration Svs. (Appeal)” from Faustin. The receipt was dated October 29, 2018. The board denied Faustin’s motion because he had not: (1) complied with the requirements for alleging an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim under Matter of Lozada, 19 I. & N. Dec. 637 (BIA 1988); and (2) explained the inconsistencies between the affidavit in his original appeal (where Faustin said he couldn’t afford an attorney to timely appeal) and his motion for reconsideration (where he said that he paid counsel but counsel ineffectively blew the deadline). Faustin, proceeding pro se, now seeks review of the board’s denial of his reconsideration motion. We review the board’s denial of a motion for reconsideration for an abuse of discretion. Ferreira v. U.S. Att’y ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals