USCA11 Case: 19-14291 Date Filed: 07/06/2021 Page: 1 of 7 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 19-14291 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A042-355-073 ALBERIC ISRAEL, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (July 6, 2021) Before JILL PRYOR, BRANCH, and LUCK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 19-14291 Date Filed: 07/06/2021 Page: 2 of 7 Alberic Israel, proceeding pro se, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reconsider its dismissal of his appeal from the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“CAT”). The respondent argues that we lack jurisdiction in this case. In reply, Israel argues that we have jurisdiction because he raises a colorable constitutional claim—that, in light of Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018),1 the BIA and IJ erred in finding that he was removable as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16. For the reasons that follow, we dismiss the petition in part and deny it in part. I. Background Israel, a native and citizen of Haiti, was admitted to the United States in 1990 as a lawful permanent resident. In 2007, he was convicted of aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 784.045(1)(a)(1), and he was sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment. Thereafter, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) served Israel with a notice to appear, charging him as removable under (1) 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii)—because he was convicted of 1 In Dimaya, the Supreme Court held as unconstitutionally vague 18 U.S.C. § 16(b)’s residual clause. 138 S. Ct. at 1210, 1223. 2 USCA11 Case: 19-14291 Date Filed: 07/06/2021 Page: 3 of 7 an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(F), which was a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16, for which the term of imprisonment was at least one year—and (2) 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(C)—based on his conviction following his admission for using a firearm in violation of law. Israel applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. Following a merits hearing, the IJ found that Israel was removable as charged. The IJ then denied Israel’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. On April 26, 2018, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision and dismissed the appeal. Specifically, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s finding that Israel was removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(C) for having been convicted of a firearms violation, but, in light of Dimaya, it did not affirm the IJ’s finding that Israel was also removable for having been convicted of an aggravated felony involving a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 16(b). The BIA then affirmed the IJ’s findings related to Israel’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals