Fiezal Mohamad v. U.S. Attorney General


Case: 19-13971 Date Filed: 06/25/2020 Page: 1 of 7 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 19-13971 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A039-057-714 FIEZAL MOHAMAD, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (June 25, 2020) Before WILSON, GRANT, and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 19-13971 Date Filed: 06/25/2020 Page: 2 of 7 Petitioner Fiezal Mohamad, a citizen of Guyana, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) decision finding Mohamad removable under § 237(a)(2)(A)(ii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii), denying his application for cancellation of removal under INA § 240A(a), 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a), as a matter of discretion, and ordering his removal from the United States to Guyana. The IJ determined that Mohamad was removable under INA § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii), 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), because his conviction for unlawful traveling to meet a minor, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 847.0135(4)(a),1 constituted an aggravated felony as defined in INA § 101(a)(43)(A), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(A). The IJ also determined, in the alternative, that Mohamad’s convictions for theft of government property, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 641, and for unlawful traveling to meet a minor constituted crimes involving moral turpitude (“CIMT”), thus rendering Mohamad removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii) 1 Fla. Stat. § 847.0135(4)(a) makes it a second-degree felony to: travel[] any distance either within this state, to this state, or from this state by any means . . . for the purpose of engaging in any illegal act described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to otherwise engage in other unlawful sexual conduct with a child or with another person believed by the person to be a child after using a computer online service, Internet service, local bulletin board service, or any other device capable of electronic data storage or transmission to . . . seduce, solicit, lure, or entice or attempt to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child or another person believed by the person to be a child, to engage in any illegal act described in chapter 794, chapter 800, or chapter 827, or to otherwise engage in other unlawful sexual conduct with a child. 2 Case: 19-13971 Date Filed: 06/25/2020 Page: 3 of 7 (“Any alien who at any time after admission is convicted of two or more crimes involving moral turpitude, not arising out of a single scheme of criminal misconduct, regardless of whether confined therefor and regardless of whether the convictions were in a single trial, is deportable.”). The IJ then denied his application for cancellation of removal, finding that he was statutorily ineligible due to his conviction for an aggravated felony. The IJ alternatively denied relief as a matter of discretion. Mohamad appealed the IJ’s decision to the BIA, which affirmed the IJ’s determination that Mohamad was removable under § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii), ...

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