Carlos Escalona-Escalona v. U.S. Attorney General

USCA11 Case: 20-14061 Date Filed: 08/02/2022 Page: 1 of 21 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-14061 ____________________ CARLOS ESCALONA-ESCALONA, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A213-448-837 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 20-14061 Date Filed: 08/02/2022 Page: 2 of 21 2 Opinion of the Court 20-14061 Before JILL PRYOR, GRANT, and MARCUS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Carlos Escalona-Escalona, a native and citizen of Cuba, en- tered the United States without having been admitted or paroled and without a valid entry document. Officers for the United States Border Patrol (“Border Patrol”) encountered Escalona-Escalona near the United States-Mexico border, stopped him, searched him, and discovered his Cuban passport and Cuban identification card. The officers arrested Escalona-Escalona and took him to a pro- cessing center in Texas, where he admitted to being in the country without authorization. The Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) eventually transferred Escalona-Escalona to a detention facility in Georgia, where he was ordered to appear for removal proceedings. Once removal proceedings began, Escalona-Escalona filed two motions. In his first motion, he moved to change venue to a detention facility in Florida, claiming that proceeding in Georgia would make it difficult for him to communicate with his lawyer and to call witnesses to testify. In his second motion, Escalona-Es- calona moved to suppress the evidence DHS relied upon to estab- lish that he was in the country without authorization—his Cuban passport, Cuban identification card, and admission made under ar- rest. Escalona-Escalona argued that Border Patrol officers violated his Fourth Amendment rights in stopping and searching him and that the exclusionary rule barred DHS’s use of that evidence. Esca- lona-Escalona also applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and USCA11 Case: 20-14061 Date Filed: 08/02/2022 Page: 3 of 21 20-14061 Opinion of the Court 3 relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“CAT”). The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denied all the relief Escalona- Escalona sought: his motion to change venue, his motion to sup- press, and his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief. Escalona-Escalona appealed to the Board of Immigra- tion Appeals (“BIA”). The BIA affirmed the IJ’s decisions. Now, Escalona-Escalona petitions this Court to review the BIA’s final order. First, he argues that the BIA erred in affirming the IJ’s denial of his motion to change venue. Second, he maintains that the BIA erred in affirming the IJ’s denial of his motion to suppress. Third, he contends that the BIA erred in affirming the IJ’s denial of his asylum, withholding-of-removal, and CAT claims. After thor- ough review and with the benefit of oral argument, we find no grounds for relief on any of the issues Escalona-Escalona raises. We therefore deny his petition. I. BACKGROUND We begin with the factual background, starting with the ear- liest episode of Escalona-Escalona’s mistreatment at the hands of the Cuban government and …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals