USCA11 Case: 20-11474 Date Filed: 12/03/2020 Page: 1 of 5 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 20-11474 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A206-471-961 FRANCISCO FRANCISCO-PEDRO, Petitioner, versus UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (December 3, 2020) Before MARTIN, LAGOA, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Francisco Francisco-Pedro, a native and citizen of Guatemala, seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision affirming denial of his application for cancellation of removal. Francisco-Pedro argues that the Immigration Judge USCA11 Case: 20-11474 Date Filed: 12/03/2020 Page: 2 of 5 erroneously concluded that he had failed to establish that his removal would cause a qualifying relative to suffer an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship. Because Francisco-Pedro has not argued any constitutional or legal error, only a discretionary one, we lack jurisdiction over his petition. Upon consideration, the petition is DISMISSED. BACKGROUND We presume familiarity with the factual and procedural history and describe it below only to the extent necessary to address the issues raised in this appeal. The Department of Homeland Security issued a notice to appear to Francisco- Pedro, charging that he was removable because he was present in the country without having been admitted or paroled and without a valid entry document. Francisco- Pedro sought to avoid removal by filing an application for cancellation of removal and adjustment of status. He argued that his removal would cause his citizen son, now sixteen, to suffer exceptional and extremely unusual hardship from his father’s removal. At a preliminary hearing, Francisco-Pedro admitted to the Department’s allegations and conceded he was removable as charged. At the merits hearing, Francisco-Pedro testified that in 2000 he entered the United States. He was in his mid-teens at the time. His parents and siblings remained in Guatemala where they are farmers. Soon after entering the United States, he began living with his partner. They had a son together. Francisco-Pedro’s main concern for 2 USCA11 Case: 20-11474 Date Filed: 12/03/2020 Page: 3 of 5 his son is that he would not have access to the same medical care and educational opportunities in Guatemala. Francisco-Pedro testified that his son is a good student. He also testified that his son sometimes gets sick but has no specific medical problems. On direct examination, Francisco-Pedro testified that, if removed, he would not bring his son and partner with him to Guatemala because he would not be able to support them, they would not have accommodations, and his son does not speak much Spanish. On cross-examination, Francisco-Pedro stated that, if removed, he would take his son and partner with him, but they would experience hardship. The Immigration Judge denied Francisco-Pedro’s application for cancellation of removal in a written decision. The Immigration Judge found that Francisco-Pedro, if removed, would leave his son in the United States. The Immigration Judge also found that although Francisco-Pedro had been continuously present in the United States for ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals