Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Naing Aung Mon v. Jefferson B. Sessions, 16-4476 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 16-4476 Visitors: 20
Filed: Sep. 15, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-4476 _ Naing Aung Mon lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General of the United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent _ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals _ Submitted: September 7, 2017 Filed: September 15, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Naing Aung Mon, a native of Burma, petitions for review of an o
More
                 United States Court of Appeals
                            For the Eighth Circuit
                        ___________________________

                                No. 16-4476
                        ___________________________

                                Naing Aung Mon

                            lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

                                          v.

   Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General of the United States of America

                           lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent
                                   ____________

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

                          Submitted: September 7, 2017
                           Filed: September 15, 2017
                                 [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
                         ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Naing Aung Mon, a native of Burma, petitions for review of an order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) upholding an immigration judge’s (IJ’s)
decision to terminate a prior grant of deferral from removal under the Convention
Against Torture (CAT). We lack jurisdiction, because the underlying removal order
was based on the determination that Mon was removable due to his aggravated felony
conviction, and he has not raised any constitutional claims or questions of law for
review. See 8 U.S.C. § 1251(a)(2)(C)-(D) (criminal alien bar); Gallimore v. Holder,
715 F.3d 687
, 690 (8th Cir. 2013) (applying criminal alien bar to order denying CAT
deferral). The petition for review is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
                       ______________________________




                                        -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer