Luis Ayllon Duran v. William Barr ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 19-1474
    LUIS PABLO AYLLON DURAN,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
    Submitted: November 20, 2019                                 Decided: December 5, 2019
    Before AGEE and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Alfred Lincoln Robertson, Jr., ROBERTSON LAW OFFICE, PLLC, Springfield, Virginia,
    for Petitioner. Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jane Candaux, Assistant
    Director, Stephen P. Finn, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED
    STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Luis Pablo Ayllon Duran, a native and citizen of Bolivia, petitions for review of an
    order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the
    Immigration Judge’s denial of his request for withholding of removal and protection under
    the Convention Against Torture. For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss the petition
    for review.
    Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) (2018), we lack jurisdiction, except as
    provided in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) (2018), to review the final order of removal of an
    alien who is removable for having been convicted of certain enumerated crimes, including
    an aggravated felony. Under § 1252(a)(2)(C), we retain jurisdiction “to review factual
    determinations that trigger the jurisdiction-stripping provision, such as whether [Ayllon
    Duran] [i]s an alien and whether []he has been convicted of an aggravated felony.”
    Ramtulla v. Ashcroft, 
    301 F.3d 202
    , 203 (4th Cir. 2002). Once we confirm these two factual
    determinations, then, under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), (D), we can only consider
    “constitutional claims or questions of law.” § 1252(a)(2)(D); see Turkson v. Holder, 
    667 F.3d 523
    , 527 (4th Cir. 2012).
    Because Ayllon Duran has conceded that he is a native and citizen of Bolivia and
    that he has been convicted of a criminal offense that qualifies as an aggravated felony, see
    8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(B) (2018) (defining aggravated felony as including “illicit
    trafficking in a controlled substance”), we find that § 1252(a)(2)(C) divests us of
    2
    jurisdiction over the petition for review. * We therefore dismiss the petition for review. We
    dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
    presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
    process.
    PETITION DISMISSED
    *
    Upon review, we conclude that Ayllon Duran does not raise any questions of law
    or constitutional issues that would fall into the exception set forth in § 1252(a)(2)(D). See
    Saintha v. Mukasey, 
    516 F.3d 243
    , 250 (4th Cir. 2008).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-1474

Filed Date: 12/5/2019

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 12/5/2019