Sean Glod v. Eric Holder, Jr.
This text of 561 F. App'x 266 (Sean Glod v. Eric Holder, Jr.) 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.
Opinion
Petition dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Sean Byrd Glod, a native of Venezuela and a citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s denial of his request for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. For the reasons discussed below, we dismiss the petition for review.
*267 Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), we lack jurisdiction, except as provided in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D), to review the final order of removal of an alien who is removable for having been convicted of certain enumerated offenses, including an aggravated felony. Under § 1252(a)(2)(C), we retain jurisdiction “to review factual determinations that trigger the jurisdiction-stripping provision, such as whether [Glod i]s an alien and whether []he has been convicted of an aggravated felony.” Ramtulla v. Ashcroft, 301 F.3d 202, 203 (4th Cir.2002). Once we confirm these two factual determinations, we may only consider “constitutional claims or questions of law.” § 1252(a)(2)(D); see also Turkson v. Holder, 667 F.3d 523, 527 (4th Cir.2012).
Because Glod has conceded that he is an alien and that he has been convicted of an aggravated felony, we find that § 1252(a)(2)(C) divests us of jurisdiction over the petition for review. We have reviewed his claims on appeal and find that he raises no colorable questions of law or constitutional claims. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
561 F. App'x 266, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sean-glod-v-eric-holder-jr-ca4-2014.