eLaws | Code of Federal Regulations | United States Code |
 All Courts
 Federal Courts
 US Court of Appeals Cases
 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
 2023-07

Tegwi v. Garland ( 2023 )


Menu:
 
  • Case: 22-60670         Document: 00516810033             Page: 1      Date Filed: 07/05/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit
____________
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
No. 22-60670
Summary Calendar                                  FILED
____________                                     July 5, 2023
Lyle W. Cayce
Sandrah Ache Tegwi,                                                                 Clerk
Petitioner,
versus
Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General,
Respondent.
______________________________
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Agency No. A213 315 740
______________________________
Before Barksdale, Elrod, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam: *
Sandrah Ache Tegwi, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for
review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying her
motion for reconsideration; and, on remand, again denying her motion to
reopen. (Tegwi’s briefing challenges only the denial of her motion to reopen.
She makes no assertions concerning the denial of her motion to reconsider;
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-60670      Document: 00516810033           Page: 2     Date Filed: 07/05/2023
No. 22-60670
therefore, she has abandoned any challenges to denial of that motion. E.g.,
Soadjede v. Ashcroft,
    324 F.3d 830
    , 833 (5th Cir. 2003).)
The remand was pursuant to our court’s granting the parties’ joint
motion to remand for the BIA to consider whether Tegwi had a viable claim
for ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC).        Tegwi, in pertinent part,
maintains the BIA erred in ruling she failed to show she was prejudiced by
her former attorney’s decision not to challenge an adverse-credibility ruling
in her appeal to the BIA from an order of the Immigration Judge denying her
application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
Convention Against Torture.
Because motions to reopen are “disfavored”, their denial is reviewed
under “a highly deferential abuse-of-discretion standard”. Gonzalez-Cantu
v. Sessions,
    866 F.3d 302
    , 304–05 (5th Cir. 2017) (citations omitted). This
standard requires a ruling to stand so long as “it is not capricious, without
foundation in the evidence, or otherwise so irrational that it is arbitrary rather
than the result of any perceptible rational approach”.
    Id.
     (citation omitted).
To succeed on her IAC claim, Tegwi must show:                   counsel’s
performance was constitutionally deficient; and the deficiency prejudiced
her. E.g., Diaz v. Sessions,
    894 F.3d 222
    , 228 (5th Cir. 2018). She has not
shown “a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors,
the result of the proceeding[s] would have been different”; accordingly, the
BIA did not abuse its discretion.
    Id.
     (citation omitted).
Because Tegwi’s IAC claim is dispositive, we need not consider her
remaining contentions regarding her entitlement to relief. E.g., INS v.
Bagamasbad,
    429 U.S. 24
    , 25 (1976) (“As a general rule courts and agencies
are not required to make findings on issues the decision of which is
unnecessary to the results they reach.”).
DENIED.
2