16-3331 Bastian-Mojica v. Sessions BIA Straus, IJ A074 908 814 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION ASUMMARY ORDER@). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 2 held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 3 New York, on the 5th day of December, two thousand seventeen. 4 5 PRESENT: 6 JON O. NEWMAN, 7 JOSÉ A. CABRANES, 8 Circuit Judges, 9 ROBERT N. CHATIGNY, 10 District Judge. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 Javier Bastian-Mojica, 14 15 Petitioner, 16 17 v. 16-3331 18 19 Jefferson B. Sessions III, United States 20 Attorney General, 21 22 Respondent. 23 _____________________________________ 24 25 FOR PETITIONER: Nancy E. Martin, Anthony D. Collins, Collins & 26 Martin, P.C., Wethersfield, CT. 27 28 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant Attorney 29 General; Cindy S. Ferrier, Assistant Director; Song 30 E. Park, Senior Litigation Counsel, Office of 31 Immigration Litigation, United States Department of 32 Justice, Washington, DC. Judge Robert N. Chatigny, of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation. 1 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of Immigration 2 Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the 3 petition for review is GRANTED and the case is REMANDED to the BIA. 4 Petitioner Javier Bastian-Mojica, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of an August 5 31, 2016, decision of the BIA affirming a July 28, 2015, decision of an immigration judge (“IJ”) 6 ordering Bastian-Mojica removed to Mexico. In re Javier Bastian-Mojica, No. A074 908 814 7 (B.I.A. Aug. 31, 2016), aff’g No. A074 908 814 (Immig. Ct. Hartford July 28, 2015). We assume 8 the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history in this case. 9 Bastian-Mojica was ordered removed for an aggravated felony theft offense, which 10 ordinarily would preclude review. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C). However, we retain 11 jurisdiction to consider the question of law that he raises: whether his conviction for fourth degree 12 larceny in violation of Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-125 is an aggravated felony theft 13 offense as defined in 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(G). See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) (providing that 14 jurisdictional bars do not preclude review of “constitutional claims or questions of law”). We 15 review questions of law de novo. Pierre v. Holder, 588 F.3d 767, 772 (2d Cir. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals