19-1349 Thelemaque v. Barr BIA Mulligan, IJ A031 130 472 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT=S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. 1 At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals 2 for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall 3 United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of 4 New York, on the 11th day of August, two thousand twenty. 5 6 PRESENT: 7 ROBERT A. KATZMANN, 8 Chief Judge, 9 RICHARD J. SULLIVAN, 10 STEVEN J. MENASHI, 11 Circuit Judges. 12 _____________________________________ 13 14 RAYNALD THELEMAQUE, AKA REYNALD 15 THELEMAQUE, 16 Petitioner, 17 18 v. 19-1349 19 NAC 20 WILLIAM P. BARR, UNITED STATES 21 ATTORNEY GENERAL, 22 Respondent. 23 _____________________________________ 24 25 26 1 FOR PETITIONER: Craig Relles, White Plains, NY. 2 3 FOR RESPONDENT: Ethan P. Davis, Acting Assistant 4 Attorney General; Shelley R. Goad, 5 Assistant Director; Kristen A. 6 Giuffreda, Trial Attorney, Office 7 of Immigration Litigation, United 8 States Department of Justice, 9 Washington, DC. 10 UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a 11 Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby 12 ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review 13 is DENIED. 14 Petitioner Raynald Thelemaque, a native and citizen of 15 Haiti, seeks review of an April 9, 2019 decision of the BIA 16 affirming an October 22, 2018 decision of an Immigration Judge 17 (“IJ”) denying Thelemaque’s application for relief under the 18 Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Raynald 19 Thelemaque, No. A 031 130 472 (B.I.A. Apr. 9, 2019), aff’g 20 No. A 031 130 472 (Immig. Ct. N.Y. City Oct. 22, 2018). We 21 assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and 22 procedural history in this case. 23 We review the IJ’s decision as supplemented by the BIA. 24 See Yan Chen v. Gonzales, 417 F.3d 268, 271 (2d Cir. 2005). 25 Thelemaque argues for the first time that his conviction for 26 sexual abuse in the second degree in violation of New York 2 1 Penal Law § 130.60(2) is not an aggravated felony. We do not 2 consider this issue because, as the Government points out, 3 Thelemaque did not challenge his grounds of removability 4 before the BIA. See Lin Zhong v. U.S. Dep’t of Just., 480 5 F.3d 104, 121–22 (2d Cir. 2007) (holding that issue exhaustion 6 is mandatory and our review is generally limited to the 7 arguments raised before ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals