Gomez v. Gonzales

Fourth Circuit

Gomez v. Gonzales

121 F. App'x 525

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 10, 2005

Docket04-1676

StatusUnpublished

This text of 121 F. App'x 525 (Gomez v. Gonzales) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gomez v. Gonzales, 121 F. App'x 525 (4th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Gilberto A. Gomez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s order finding him removable from the United States. For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

Gomez was found removable as an alien convicted of a crime involving child abuse; as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony offense; and as an aggravated felon convicted of a crime of violence for which the sentence imposed is one year or more. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), (a)(2)(E)(i) (2000). Under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) (2000), “[njotwithstanding any other provision of law, no court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed a criminal offense covered in section ... 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).”

We have noted that “under this section there is plainly no appellate recourse from a final order of removal for an alien who is removable because he has committed an offense encompassed by section 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), that is, because he has committed an aggravated felony.” Lewis v. INS, 194 F.3d 539, 541 (4th Cir.1999). We retain jurisdiction to determine whether the jurisdictional facts precluding review are present in a particular case. Id. at 541-42. The jurisdictional bar is triggered by a determination that a petitioner is an alien who has been convicted of one of the statutorily enumerated offenses requiring removal. Id. at 542.

Based on our review of the record, we find that Gomez is an alien who is removable for having committed an aggravated felony. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. We 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

Gilberto A. Gomez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s order finding him removable from the United States. For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

Gomez was found removable as an alien convicted of a crime involving child abuse; as an alien convicted of an aggravated felony offense; and as an aggravated felon convicted of a crime of violence for which the sentence imposed is one year or more. 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), (a)(2)(E)(i) (2000). Under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) (2000), “[njotwithstanding any other provision of law, no court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed a criminal offense covered in section ... 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).”

We have noted that “under this section there is plainly no appellate recourse from a final order of removal for an alien who is removable because he has committed an offense encompassed by section 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), that is, because he has committed an aggravated felony.” Lewis v. INS, 194 F.3d 539, 541 (4th Cir.1999). We retain jurisdiction to determine whether the jurisdictional facts precluding review are present in a particular case. Id. at 541-42. The jurisdictional bar is triggered by a determination that a petitioner is an alien who has been convicted of one of the statutorily enumerated offenses requiring removal. Id. at 542.

Based on our review of the record, we find that Gomez is an alien who is removable for having committed an aggravated felony. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. We 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 F. App'x 525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gomez-v-gonzales-ca4-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack