Filed: Mar. 07, 2003
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 02-60259 Summary Calendar YASSIN SHEIK HAMUD, Petitioner, versus JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. - Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A77 008 260 - March 7, 2003 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Yassin Sheik Hamud is a native of Somalia who attempted to enter this country in May 1999 with a fraudulent passport. This fraud was discovered,
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 02-60259 Summary Calendar YASSIN SHEIK HAMUD, Petitioner, versus JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. - Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A77 008 260 - March 7, 2003 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Yassin Sheik Hamud is a native of Somalia who attempted to enter this country in May 1999 with a fraudulent passport. This fraud was discovered, a..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-60259
Summary Calendar
YASSIN SHEIK HAMUD,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT,
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A77 008 260
--------------------
March 7, 2003
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Yassin Sheik Hamud is a native of Somalia who attempted to
enter this country in May 1999 with a fraudulent passport. This
fraud was discovered, and removal proceedings were instituted
against him. He conceded deportability and sought asylum,
withholding of removal, and, in the alternative, voluntary
departure. After conducting a hearing, an immigration judge
denied all of his claims and ordered him removed from the United
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 02-60259
-2-
States. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed Hamud’s
appeal pursuant to 8 C.F.R. § 3.1(d)(2)(i)(D) because he failed
to file a brief or statement after indicating that he would do so
in his notice of appeal. Hamud now petitions this court for
review of the BIA’s decision. Hamud has failed to brief, and has
thus waived, the central issue whether the BIA erred in summarily
dismissing his appeal. See Strong v. BellSouth Telecomms. Inc.,
137 F.3d 844, 853 (5th Cir. 1998). Because he has waived this
issue, he has not shown that the BIA erred in relying on 8 C.F.R.
§ 3.1(d)(2)(i)(D) to summarily dismiss his appeal. Accordingly,
his petition for review is DENIED.