NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 21-3180 ___________ MEMET GEZER, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ____________________________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A209-173-321) Immigration Judge: Emily Farrar-Crockett ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) October 25, 2022 Before: JORDAN, GREENAWAY, JR., and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed December 8, 2022) ___________ OPINION* ___________ PER CURIAM Memet Gezer petitions for review from a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). For the reasons that follow, we will deny the petition for review. * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. Gezer, a citizen of Turkey, was admitted to the United States in 2016 for the purpose of criminal prosecution. He pleaded guilty to conspiracy to aid and abet the possession of firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense and was sentenced to five years in prison. After serving his sentence, he was charged as removable as a noncitizen who was not in possession of a valid entry document. Proceeding pro se, he applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). An Immigration Judge (“IJ”) determined that Gezer was ineligible for asylum or withholding of removal because he had been convicted of a particularly serious crime. After a hearing, the IJ denied Gezer’s application for deferral of removal, having determined that he was not credible and that he had not shown that he was entitled to relief. Gezer filed a counseled appeal to the BIA, challenging, inter alia, the IJ’s serious crime analysis and adverse credibility determination. The BIA determined that Gezer’s conviction for conspiracy to aid and abet the possession of firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking offense was an aggravated felony drug trafficking crime and, because he was sentenced to five years in prison, a particularly serious crime. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B) (noncitizen is considered to have been convicted of a particularly serious crime if convicted of an aggravated felony and sentenced to a term of imprisonment of at least five years). The BIA adopted and affirmed the IJ’s adverse credibility determination and denial of deferral of removal. The BIA dismissed the appeal and ordered Gezer removed to Turkey. Gezer filed a pro se petition for review. 2 We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We will address those issues raised by Gezer in his brief that were also exhausted before the BIA. 8 U.S.C. 1252(d)(1) (providing that court may review final order of removal only if “the alien has exhausted all administrative remedies available to the alien as of right”); see Barna v. Bd. of Sch. Dirs. of Panther Valley Sch. Dist., 877 F.3d 136, 145 (3d Cir. 2017) (“[W]e have consistently refused to consider ill-developed arguments or those not properly raised and discussed in the appellate briefing.”). Gezer argues in his brief that the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals