Appellate Case: 20-9653 Document: 010110631503 Date Filed: 01/13/2022 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT January 13, 2022 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court LUIS RAMON MEDELLIN-ZAPATA, Petitioner, v. No. 20-9653 (Petition for Review) MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT* _________________________________ Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, MORITZ and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ An Immigration Judge (IJ) ordered Luis Ramon Medellin-Zapata (Petitioner) removed from the United States based on his conviction of an aggravated felony— conspiracy to commit noncitizen smuggling. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upheld the IJ’s order. Petitioner has filed a petition for review. Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a), we dismiss the petition in part for lack of jurisdiction and otherwise deny the petition. * After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Appellate Case: 20-9653 Document: 010110631503 Date Filed: 01/13/2022 Page: 2 I. BACKGROUND Petitioner is a native and citizen of Mexico, and his wife is a lawful permanent resident. They have three children. The eldest, Luis, was removed from the United States in 2011 and 2016. Their middle son, Edgar, holds a U-visa.1 And their youngest, Marco, is a United States citizen. In 2018, Petitioner was a U-visa holder and applied to adjust his status to lawful permanent resident. While in detention for the noncitizen-smuggling offense at issue in this case, his application was approved. In May 2019, Petitioner’s wife told him that Luis had called and said he intended to return to the United States by crossing the border with an individual, and a second person would drive him to Santa Fe, New Mexico, where Petitioner and his family lived. Two weeks later, Luis called to say he had crossed the border near El Paso, Texas, but the person who was supposed to pick him up never arrived. Petitioner felt he could not leave his son alone and let his wife down, so he and Edgar drove to Texas to get Luis. That evening, a Border Patrol agent learned that two individuals had gone over the border fence near El Paso. As he responded, the agent was advised that two individuals were seen running through a backyard and likely to emerge on Petunia Drive in San Elizario, Texas. The agent saw Petitioner’s car on Petunia Drive, just north of the border fence, and followed it for several streets until it made a left turn. 1 “The U-Visa classification covers eligible aliens who are victims of serious …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals