Case: 16-10368 Date Filed: 01/03/2019 Page: 1 of 10 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 16-10368 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ Agency No. A087-895-036 RAUL ACEVEDO GONZALEZ, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ________________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals ________________________ (January 3, 2019) Before TJOFLAT, NEWSOM, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges. Case: 16-10368 Date Filed: 01/03/2019 Page: 2 of 10 PER CURIAM: Petitioner Raul Acevedo Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’s (“BIA”) final order affirming the decision of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”). The IJ pretermitted Petitioner’s application for cancellation of removal after concluding that Petitioner had been convicted of an offense that qualified as both an aggravated felony and as a crime involving moral turpitude (“CIMT”). We grant the petition in part; vacate the part of the BIA’s order classifying Petitioner’s conviction as an aggravated felony; and deny the petition in part. I. Background Petitioner first entered the United States without inspection in 2000. In 2010, Petitioner was charged as removable (1) for being present in the United States without having been admitted or paroled, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i), and (2) for having been convicted of a CIMT, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2)(A)(i)(I). Petitioner conceded removability for having not been admitted or paroled. Petitioner also admitted that he had a 2009 conviction for fleeing or attempting to 2 Case: 16-10368 Date Filed: 01/03/2019 Page: 3 of 10 elude a law enforcement officer, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 316.1935(2); but Petitioner denied that this conviction constituted a CIMT. Petitioner then applied for cancellation of removal, on grounds that his removal would result in exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his wife and children, who are United States citizens. After a merits hearing, the IJ pretermitted Petitioner’s application for cancellation of removal and ordered Petitioner removed to Mexico. The IJ first concluded that Petitioner’s 2009 conviction for fleeing or eluding a law enforcement officer constituted an aggravated felony, making Petitioner ineligible for most forms of discretionary relief. The IJ also determined that Petitioner’s 2009 conviction was categorically a CIMT and, as a result, that Petitioner was statutorily ineligible for cancellation of removal. The IJ noted that Petitioner had declined the opportunity to apply for withholding of removal or for protection under the Convention Against Torture. The BIA affirmed and adopted the IJ’s decision. 3 Case: 16-10368 Date Filed: 01/03/2019 Page: 4 of 10 II. Standard of Review Because the BIA adopted expressly the IJ’s decision, we review the decisions of both the BIA and the IJ on appeal. See Ayala v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 605 F.3d 941, 948 (11th Cir. 2010). We review de novo whether an alien’s conviction constitutes an aggravated felony. Accardo v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 634 F.3d 1333, 1335 (11th Cir. 2011). We also review de novo whether a conviction qualifies as a CIMT. Gelin v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 837 F.3d 1236, 1240 (11th Cir. ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals