Beharry v. Gonzales ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-2402
NICHOLAS S. BEHARRY,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A27-959-070)
Submitted: January 19, 2007 Decided: February 26, 2007
Before SHEDD and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Nicholas S. Beharry, Petitioner Pro Se. M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright,
Song E. Park, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
On October 31, 2005, Nicholas S. Beharry, a native and
citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, filed a habeas corpus petition in
the district court challenging an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals that affirms the Immigration Judge’s order of removal. The
district court transferred the habeas corpus petition to this
court, and it was docketed as a petition for review of the Board’s
order.
We find that the habeas petition was not properly
transferred to this court and may not be considered a timely
petition for review. See Chen v. Gonzales, 435 F.3d 788, 790 (7th
Cir. 2006) (noting that a § 2241 petition challenging a removal
order filed in the district court after the enactment of the Real
ID Act on May 11, 2005, must be dismissed); Medellin-Reyes v.
Gonzales, 435 F.3d 721, 723-24 (7th Cir. 2006) (finding that
collateral proceedings filed after May 11, 2005, will be dismissed
outright, given that the window for belated judicial review has
closed). Nor does the district court have jurisdiction over the
petition. See 8 U.S.C.A. § 1252(b)(9) (West 2005).
We accordingly dismiss the petition for review for lack
of jurisdiction. We deny Beharry’s pending motion to stay removal
as moot and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DISMISSED
- 2 -