17-680 Canahui Gonzalez v. Sessions BIA Straus, IJ A206 222 427 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 “SUMMARY 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 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 31st day of October, two thousand eighteen. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 DENNIS JACOBS, 8 GUIDO CALABRESI, 9 SUSAN L. CARNEY, 10 Circuit Judges. 11 _____________________________________ 12 13 ITZLER ARNALDO CANAHUI GONZALEZ, AKA 14 ITZLER ARNOLDO GONZALEZ, AKA ETZLER 15 ARNOLD CANAHUI GONZALEZ, AKA ETZLER 16 ARNOLDO CANAHUI, AKA ITXLER CANAHUI, 17 AKA ETZLER GONZALEA, 18 Petitioner, 19 20 v. 17-680 21 NAC 22 JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, 23 UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, 24 Respondent. 25 _____________________________________ 26 27 FOR PETITIONER: Jon E. Jessen, Stamford, CT. 28 29 FOR RESPONDENT: Chad A. Readler, Acting Assistant 30 Attorney General; Janette L. 31 Allen, Senior Litigation Counsel; 32 Lance L. Jolley, Trial Attorney, 1 Office of Immigration Litigation, 2 United States Department of 3 Justice, Washington, DC. 4 5 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 6 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 7 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 8 is DISMISSED. 9 Petitioner Itzler Arnaldo Canahui Gonzalez, a native and 10 citizen of Guatemala, seeks review of a February 24, 2017, 11 decision of the BIA affirming a May 23, 2016, decision of an 12 Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying withholding of removal and 13 relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re 14 Itzler Arnaldo Canahui Gonzalez, No. A206 222 427 (B.I.A. 15 Feb. 24, 2017), aff’g No. A206 222 427 (Immig. Ct. Hartford 16 May 23, 2016). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the 17 underlying facts and procedural history in this case. 18 We have reviewed the IJ’s decision as modified by the 19 BIA, i.e., minus the denial of asylum and the social group 20 finding the BIA did not reach. See Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. 21 Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005). Where, 22 as here, a petitioner was ordered removed under 8 U.S.C. 23 § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I) for having been convicted of a crime 24 involving moral turpitude, our jurisdiction is limited to 25 constitutional claims and questions of law, 8 U.S.C. 2 1 § 1252(a)(2)(C), (D), which we review de novo, Pierre v. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals