Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02953/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02953-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alberto Gonzales
Respondent
Martial Touho
Petitioner

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-2953

___________

Martial Touho, *

*

Petitioner, *

* Petition for Review of a

v. * Final Decision of the

* Board of Immigration Appeals.

Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General *

of the United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Respondent. *

___________

Submitted: June 13, 2007

Filed: June 20, 2007

___________

Before BYE, RILEY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner Martial Touho (Touho), a native and citizen of the Ivory Coast,

applied for asylum, withholding of removal, protection under the Convention Against

Torture (CAT), and alternatively, voluntary departure. The IJ denied Touho’s

applications finding Touho was not a credible witness, had submitted three fraudulent

documents in support of his asylum application, and failed to establish past

persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution. The Board of Immigration

Affairs (BIA) affirmed the IJ’s decision.

Appellate Case: 06-2953 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/20/2007 Entry ID: 3321040
-2-

On the same day Touho filed a petition for review with this court, Touho filed

a motion to reopen with the BIA, pursuant to section 245 of the Immigration and

Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. § 1255, on grounds he recently married a United

States citizen. Without deciding Touho’s eligibility for an adjustment of status, the

BIA reopened Touho’s removal proceeding. Thereafter, we dismissed Touho’s

petition for review for lack of a final order of removal.

The IJ denied Touho’s applications for adjustment of status and voluntary

departure, finding Touho submitted fraudulent documents in connection with his

earlier petition and his recent marriage was a sham entered into for the purpose of

gaining immigration benefits. The IJ also denied Touho’s extreme hardship waiver

finding Touho’s new wife, before marrying Touho, supported herself despite her

numerous medical problems and could do so again if Touho were deported. On

review, the BIA affirmed the IJ’s ultimate decision, concluding Touho had not

meaningfully challenged or addressed the IJ’s discretionary findings, but the BIA

disagreed with the IJ’s sham marriage finding. Touho appeals, challenging the BIA’s

failure to remand for reconsideration of the hardship waiver after reversing the IJ’s

sham marriage finding.

Adjustment of status and hardship waivers are decisions within the discretion

of the Attorney General. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182(i)(1), 1255(a)(2). Except for

constitutional claims and questions of law, see id. § 1252(a)(2)(D), Congress has not

bestowed jurisdiction on the courts to review these decisions. See id. §§ 1182(i)(2),

1252(a)(2)(B)(i) (“[N]o court shall have jurisdiction to review . . . any judgment

regarding the granting of relief under section . . . 1255 of [Title 8].”); see also Ebrahim

v. Gonzales, 471 F.3d 880, 883-84 (8th Cir. 2006); Ignatova v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d

1209, 1213 (8th Cir. 2005). Touho does not raise any constitutional or legal questions

to trigger any jurisdiction in this court. Because we lack jurisdiction to review the

Attorney General’s discretionary decisions to deny adjustment of status and hardship

waiver, Touho’s petition is dismissed.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-2953 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/20/2007 Entry ID: 3321040