Sadou Bah v. Alberto Gonzales

Eighth Circuit

Sadou Bah v. Alberto Gonzales

457 F.3d 838, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20352, 2006 WL 2265572

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedAugust 9, 2006

Docket05-2734

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 457 F.3d 838 (Sadou Bah v. Alberto Gonzales) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sadou Bah v. Alberto Gonzales, 457 F.3d 838, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20352, 2006 WL 2265572 (8th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Liberian citizen Sadou Bah petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) finding lack of jurisdiction to entertain Bah’s appeal of an Immigration Judge’s (IJ’s) denial of his motion to reopen removal proceedings. The BIA erroneously found that Bah had failed to argue, in his brief to the BIA, that his appeal waiver was not knowing and intelligent. We thus remand the case to the BIA for it to determine in the first instance the validity of Bah’s waiver of his right to administrative appeal. See United States v. Rodriguez, 420 F.3d 831, 834 (8th Cir.2005) (where waivers of right to appeal were not considered or intelligent, alien was deprived of judicial review of deportation proceeding); Palavra v. INS, 287 F.3d 690, 694 (8th Cir.2002) (where agency failed to perform its fact-finding function, case was not ripe for appellate review); cf. El-Sheikh v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 643, 648 (8th Cir.2004) (lacking BIA finding as to asylum applicant’s credibility and BIA analysis of what material facts central to his claim of past persecution should have been reasonably corroborated, court of appeals had no way of reviewing BIA’s actual reasoning).

Accordingly, we grant Bah’s petition for review, and we remand to the BIA for a determination as to the validity of Bah’s appeal waiver.

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

PER CURIAM.

Liberian citizen Sadou Bah petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) finding lack of jurisdiction to entertain Bah’s appeal of an Immigration Judge’s (IJ’s) denial of his motion to reopen removal proceedings. The BIA erroneously found that Bah had failed to argue, in his brief to the BIA, that his appeal waiver was not knowing and intelligent. We thus remand the case to the BIA for it to determine in the first instance the validity of Bah’s waiver of his right to administrative appeal. See United States v. Rodriguez, 420 F.3d 831, 834 (8th Cir.2005) (where waivers of right to appeal were not considered or intelligent, alien was deprived of judicial review of deportation proceeding); Palavra v. INS, 287 F.3d 690, 694 (8th Cir.2002) (where agency failed to perform its fact-finding function, case was not ripe for appellate review); cf. El-Sheikh v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 643, 648 (8th Cir.2004) (lacking BIA finding as to asylum applicant’s credibility and BIA analysis of what material facts central to his claim of past persecution should have been reasonably corroborated, court of appeals had no way of reviewing BIA’s actual reasoning).

Accordingly, we grant Bah’s petition for review, and we remand to the BIA for a determination as to the validity of Bah’s appeal waiver.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

457 F.3d 838, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 20352, 2006 WL 2265572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sadou-bah-v-alberto-gonzales-ca8-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack