Ruben Rodriguez-Nevarez v. Eric H. Holder, Jr. , 595 F. App'x 660 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 14-2652
    ___________________________
    Ruben Rodriguez-Nevarez
    lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner
    v.
    Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States
    lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent
    ____________
    Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    ____________
    Submitted: February 20, 2015
    Filed: March 12, 2015
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Mexican citizen Ruben Rodriguez-Nevarez petitions for review of an order of
    the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s order (1)
    finding petitioner removable, due to his state conviction for a controlled substance
    violation, and (2) pretermitting his applications for cancellation of removal and
    discretionary waiver of inadmissibility, because of statutory ineligibility. Petitioner
    argues that the Board of Immigration Appeals committed legal error, and violated his
    due process rights, by pretermitting his applications for relief without reviewing his
    claim regarding the retroactivity of amendments to the Immigration and Nationality
    Act.
    Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ submissions, we
    conclude that neither argument is sufficiently colorable to invoke our appellate
    jurisdiction. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), (D); Munos-Yepez v. Gonzales, 
    465 F.3d 347
    , 350-51 (8th Cir. 2006); Arellano-Garcia v. Gonzales, 
    429 F.3d 1183
    , 1185 (8th
    Cir. 2005). Petitioner does not challenge the Board’s decision in Matter of
    Abdelghany, 26 I&N Dec. 254 (2014), distinguishing INS v. St. Cyr, 
    533 U.S. 289
    (2001). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition.
    LOKEN, Circuit Judge, concurring.
    In my view, whether the BIA properly distinguished INS v. St. Cyr, 
    553 U.S. 289
    (2001), is an issue of law which we have jurisdiction to review under 8 U.S.C.
    § 1252(a)(2)(D). However, I agree with the BIA’s resolution of this issue and
    therefore concur.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 14-2652

Citation Numbers: 595 F. App'x 660

Judges: Loken, Colloton, Kelly

Filed Date: 3/12/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024