Ehiabhi Egboh v. US
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A075-564-777 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [16-1603]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Immigration Court.
December 15, 2016
January 4, 2017
Before TRAXLER and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Randall L. Johnson, JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Arlington,
Virginia, for Petitioner.
Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy
Assistant Attorney General, Anthony P. Nicastro, Assistant
Director, Vanessa M. Otero, Office of Immigration Litigation,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Ehiabhi Egboh, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for
review of the immigration judge’s order concurring with an asylum
reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Nigeria. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.31(g)(1) (2012).
jurisdiction to review the final order of removal of an alien
convicted of certain enumerated crimes, including an aggravated
We retain jurisdiction only over constitutional claims or
questions of law.
8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D) (2012); see Turkson v.
Holder, 667 F.3d 523, 526–27 (4th Cir. 2012); Gomis v. Holder, 571
F.3d 353, 358 (4th Cir. 2009) (“[A]bsent a colorable constitutional
claim or question of law, our review of the issue is not authorized
by [8 U.S.C. §] 1252(a)(2)(D).”).
Upon review, we find that the claims raised by Egboh are not
sufficiently colorable to invoke this court’s jurisdiction.
Lumataw v. Holder, 582 F.3d 78, 84 (1st Cir. 2009) (“To form the
underlying constitutional or legal question must be colorable;
that is, the argument advanced must, at the very least, have some
We dispense with oral argument because the facts
Pg: 3 of 3
and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?