Opinion ID: 857212
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Criminal Immigrant Bar

Text: As an initial matter, our review of Silevany’s petition is severely limited by the Criminal Immigrant Bar. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C). When an immigrant has been removed on the basis of his conviction for certain crimes, “no court shall have jurisdiction to review any final order of removal,” except for constitutional questions and questions of law. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C) & (D). Pertinent to the present case, convictions precluding appeal include an aggravated felony and two or more convictions for crimes of moral turpitude. 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(C). Thus, to determine whether we can address Silevany’s challenge to the denial of relief from removal, we must first examine his challenges to the removal order. The IJ found Silevany removable on several bases: she determined that two of Silevany’s convictions each individually constituted aggravated felonies and that he had two or more convictions for crimes of moral turpitude. These determinations create three separate bases to preclude judicial review of Silevany’s removal order under the Criminal Immigrant Bar. 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(C). Silevany has not challenged all of the bases for his removal. Specifically, Silevany has never appealed the IJ’s determination that he is removable for having at least two convictions for crimes of moral turpitude. Thus, he is still removable on this basis and the Criminal Immigrant Bar precludes review of his final removal order. No. 12-3512 Farsat Farhan Silevany v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General Page 8