Abdirahman Ahmed v. Robert M. Wilkinson

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
• Decided: February 1, 2021
• Docket: 20-1848
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 20-1848 ___________________________

Abdirahman Dayib Ahmed

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Robert M. Wilkinson, Acting Attorney General of United States1

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________

Submitted: January 27, 2021 Filed: February 1, 2021 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, BENTON, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

1 Robert M. Wilkinson has been appointed to serve as Acting Attorney General of the United States, and is substituted as respondent pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). Abdirahman Dayib Ahmed, a native and citizen of Somalia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which upheld an immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), after the BIA reversed the immigration judge’s grant of cancellation of removal and remanded for further proceedings. After careful review, we conclude that Ahmed waived any challenge to the denial of asylum, withholding, or CAT relief because he failed to advance any argument that the agency erred in denying such relief. See Chay-Velasquez v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004). We further conclude that Ahmed failed to fully administratively exhaust the issues raised in his brief, and we therefore do not reach those arguments. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(d)(1); Lasu v. Barr, 970 F.3d 960, 964-65 (8th Cir. 2020); Frango v. Gonzales, 437 F.3d 726, 728 (8th Cir. 2006). In any event, we lack jurisdiction to review a challenge to his arrest, see Bah v. Cangemi, 548 F.3d 680, 683 n.3 (8th Cir. 2008), and his remaining arguments are either foreclosed by this court’s precedent, Ali v. Barr, 924 F.3d 983, 985-86 (8th Cir. 2019), or not supported by the record. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review. ______________________________

-2-