Ramond Martin v. Attorney General United States

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 17-2054 ___________ RAMOND ROBERT MARTIN, a/k/a Ralph H. Martin, a/k/a John Royal, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent ____________________________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A072-784-087) Immigration Judge: Honorable Daniel A. Morris ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) April 3, 2018 Before: VANASKIE, COWEN, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: April 4, 2018) ___________ OPINION * ___________ PER CURIAM Ramond Robert Martin, a native and citizen of Jamaica, arrived in the United * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. States in 1990 as a visitor and adjusted his status to that of a lawful permanent resident in 2004. In 2012, he was convicted of several violations of N.J. Stat. § 2C:35-5(a)(1) (making it unlawful to “manufacture, distribute or dispense, or to possess or have under his control with intent to manufacture, distribute or dispense, a controlled dangerous substance or controlled substance analog”) and N.J. Stat. § 2C:35-5(b)(3) (describing his cocaine crime as a third degree offense and setting the fine). On May 7, 2015, after the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court had affirmed his judgment of conviction but before the New Jersey Supreme Court had ruled on his timely petition for certification of that decision, the Government charged Martin as removable for having been convicted of an aggravated felony relating to drug trafficking and for having been convicted of a controlled substance offense. R. 672-74. Martin, through counsel, sought to terminate the removal proceedings on the basis that his conviction was not final in light of the ongoing direct appeal proceedings. R. 639-40. Initially, the Government requested time to investigate the matter, but then, after the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled, the Government opposed the motion to terminate on the basis that the petition for certification had been denied on July 10, 2015. R. 525. The Immigration Judge (“IJ”) sustained the charges after Martin appeared with different counsel, Lauren Anselowitz, who reviewed the notice to appear and judgment of conviction at the hearing and then, on behalf of Martin, conceded the allegations related 2 to the conviction and removability charges. 1 R. 117. At a later hearing, she re-raised a version of the initial argument for termination. She stated that the conviction was not final at the time that the notice to appear issued, but first stated incorrectly that Martin’s appeal had been pending before the Appellate Division, and later represented that the appeal became final at the end of March 2015, when the Appellate Division ruled. The IJ explained that Martin was served with the notice to appear on May 7, 2015, so “that takes care of that.” R. 139. At the next hearing, Anselowitz again sought termination, this time on the actual initial argument that the petition for certification remained pending when ...

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