Andrew Fuller v. Eric Holder, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A099-809-578 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999311961]. Mailed to: Andrew Fuller. [13-2324]

Appeal: 13-2324

Doc: 16

Filed: 03/10/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2324

ANDREW BERNARD FULLER,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,
Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.

Submitted:

January 14, 2014

Decided:

March 10, 2014

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Andrew Bernard Fuller, Petitioner Pro Se. Andrea Gevas, Office
of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 13-2324

Doc: 16

Filed: 03/10/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Andrew

Bernard

Fuller,

a

native

and

citizen

of

Trinidad and Tobago, petitions for review of an order of the
Board

of

Immigration

Appeals

(“Board”)

affirming,

without

opinion, 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.
Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) (2012), we lack
jurisdiction, except as provided in 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D)
(2012), to review the final order of removal of an alien who is
removable

for

having

been

convicted

of

crimes, including an aggravated felony.

certain

enumerated

Under § 1252(a)(2)(C),

we retain jurisdiction “to review factual determinations that
trigger

the

jurisdiction-stripping

provision,

such

as

whether

[Fuller] [i]s an alien and whether []he has been convicted of an
aggravated felony.”
(4th

Cir.

2002).

Ramtulla v. Ashcroft, 301 F.3d 202, 203
Once

we

confirm

these

two

factual

determinations, then, under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), (D), we
can only consider “constitutional claims or questions of law.”
§ 1252(a)(2)(D); see Turkson v. Holder, 667 F.3d 523, 527 (4th
Cir. 2012).
Because Fuller has conceded that he is a native and
citizen of Trinidad and Tobago and that he has been convicted of
2

Appeal: 13-2324

Doc: 16

Filed: 03/10/2014

Pg: 3 of 3

a criminal offense that qualifies as an aggravated felony, see 8
U.S.C.

§ 1101(a)(43)(G)

including

“a

theft

(2012)

(defining
(including

offense

aggravated
receipt

felony
of

as

stolen

property) or burglary offense for which the term of imprisonment
[is] at least one year”), we find that § 1252(a)(2)(C) divests
us of jurisdiction over the petition for review. *
dismiss the petition for review.

We therefore

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

*

Fuller does not raise any questions of law or
constitutional issues that would fall within the exception set
forth in § 1252(a)(2)(D).

3