Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-60126/USCOURTS-ca5-14-60126-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Eric H. Holder, Jr., U. S. Attorney General
Respondent
Basilio Jimenez-Furcal
Petitioner

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-60126

Summary Calendar

BASILIO JIMENEZ-FURCAL, also known as Basilio Evaristo Jimenez Furcal,

Petitioner

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A029 855 740

Before REAVLEY, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Basilio Jimenez-Furcal, a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic,

petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), 

which dismissed his pro se appeal from the final order of removal issued by an

immigration judge. In dismissing the appeal, the BIA found that JimenezFurcal, through counsel, had waived his right to appeal; he had raised no 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 6, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

Case: 14-60126 Document: 00512994186 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/06/2015
No. 14-60126

specific argument challenging the validity of the waiver; and his appeal was 

thus not proper.

In this court, Jimenez-Furcal argues in a conclusory fashion (1) that the 

immigration judge and the BIA erred in failing to grant his motion to terminate 

his removal proceedings, which would have permitted him to resolve his 

citizenship claim in a federal district court, and (2) that his counsel rendered 

ineffective assistance by failing to pursue the motion to terminate as 

instructed. In support of these claims, Jimenez-Furcal has submitted two 

affidavits, which were not first presented to the BIA and thus may not be 

considered by this court. See Hernandez-Ortez v. Holder, 741 F.3d 644, 647 

(5th Cir. 2014).

Jimenez-Furcal has not addressed the BIA’s reasons for dismissing his 

appeal. He has thus abandoned any challenge to that decision. See Soadjede 

v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003). Accordingly, his petition for 

review is DENIED.

2

Case: 14-60126 Document: 00512994186 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/06/2015