Court Opinion

ID: 9368214
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-02-03 15:00:37.65358+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:06.407954
License: Public Domain

USCA11 Case: 22-10567   Document: 22-1      Date Filed: 02/03/2023    Page: 1 of 8

                                                  [DO NOT PUBLISH]
                                   In the
                United States Court of Appeals
                        For the Eleventh Circuit

                         ____________________

                                No. 22-10567
                          Non-Argument Calendar
                         ____________________

       YVES SANTAIS,
                                                               Petitioner,
       versus
       U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

                                                              Respondent.

                         ____________________

                   Petition for Review of a Decision of the
                        Board of Immigration Appeals
                          Agency No. A203-044-585
USCA11 Case: 22-10567     Document: 22-1     Date Filed: 02/03/2023    Page: 2 of 8

       2                      Opinion of the Court               22-10567

                           ____________________

       Before JILL PRYOR, BRANCH, and LUCK, Circuit Judges.
       PER CURIAM:
             Yves Santais petitions for review of the Board of Immigra-
       tion Appeals’ order affirming the denial of his application for asy-
       lum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention
       Against Torture. We partly dismiss and partly deny Santais’s peti-
       tion.
            I.     FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL
                                HISTORY
               Santais is a Haitian native and citizen. He was admitted to
       the United States in September 2008 and became a lawful perma-
       nent resident in 2011. In 2013, he was indicted in Georgia state
       court for pointing a gun at a female’s head, punching her in the
       face, and kicking her in the abdomen. He was convicted by a jury
       of false imprisonment and battery and was sentenced to ten years’
       imprisonment for the false imprisonment conviction and one year
       for the battery conviction, set to run consecutively.
             The federal government began deportation proceedings af-
       ter the convictions, charging that Santais was removable as a
       noncitizen convicted of an “aggravated felony.” Santais applied for
       asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the conven-
       tion.
USCA11 Case: 22-10567     Document: 22-1     Date Filed: 02/03/2023    Page: 3 of 8

       22-10567               Opinion of the Court                       3

               The immigration judge held a videoconference merits hear-
       ing on Santais’s application. Santais appeared pro se. The only
       substantive documents in the record were his application and ac-
       companying statement, deportation notice, criminal case records,
       and the Haiti 2020 Human Rights Report by the United States State
       Department. Santais testified (through an interpreter) that from
       2001 until 2008, the United States paid him to inform on supporters
       of former Haitian President Jean Bertrand Aristide. Santais
       acknowledged Aristide’s presidency ended in 2004 but insisted his
       supporters remained violent and dangerous. Santais claimed that
       in 2008 someone “outed” him and told Aristide’s supporters he was
       an informant. He alleged that Aristide’s supporters then assaulted
       and beat him. He testified that, after that beating, he feared “they
       would definitely finish me off” and flew to the United States the
       next month. Santais conceded that he didn’t know who led Haiti’s
       current government, but still insisted he’d be murdered as “a trai-
       tor” if he went back to Haiti.
              The immigration judge denied Santais’s application in its en-
       tirety because his testimony was not credible and lacked corrobo-
       ration. Alternatively, the immigration judge found that Santais
       didn’t qualify for asylum or withholding of removal because his
       battery conviction was an “aggravated felony conviction,” both his
       convictions were “particularly serious,” and he hadn’t sufficiently
       established he’d be persecuted in Haiti. Finally, the immigration
       judge found Santais ineligible for convention protection because he
USCA11 Case: 22-10567         Document: 22-1         Date Filed: 02/03/2023          Page: 4 of 8

       4                           Opinion of the Court                       22-10567

       hadn’t shown that, if returned to Haiti, he’d more likely than not
       be tortured by or with the Haitian government’s acquiescence.
              Santais appealed to the board. He argued that he’d testified
       honestly at his hearing and he challenged the underlying facts of
       his state convictions. The board affirmed without opinion, and
       Santais timely petitioned for our review. 1
                             II.     STANDARD OF REVIEW
              When the board affirms without opinion, we review the im-
       migration judge’s opinion. See K.Y. v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 43 F.4th
       1175, 1180 (11th Cir. 2022). We review legal conclusions and our
       subject matter jurisdiction de novo. Id. We review factual findings
       (including credibility determinations) under the highly deferential
       substantial evidence standard, only reversing when the record
       compels it. Hasan-Nayem v. U.S. Att’y Gen., No. 21-12402, ___
       F.4th ___, 2022 WL 17480085, at *7 (11th Cir. Dec. 7, 2022).

       1
         Santais’s petition includes federal and state constitutional arguments, but
       these must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. We lack jurisdiction over—
       and therefore can’t review—issues not presented to the board. See Indrawati
       v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 779 F.3d 1284, 1297 (11th Cir. 2015). Santais never explicitly
       or implicitly presented any constitutional arguments to the board. Accord-
       ingly, the board never “had a full opportunity to consider” them, and our re-
       view would improperly “interfere[] with the administrative process.” Id. at
       1298 (quotation omitted).
USCA11 Case: 22-10567      Document: 22-1       Date Filed: 02/03/2023     Page: 5 of 8

       22-10567                Opinion of the Court                          5

                                 III.   DISCUSSION
                Santais challenges the denial of his claims for asylum, with-
       holding of removal, and relief under the convention. We assume
       (without deciding) that the immigration judge lacked substantial
       evidence to support the adverse credibility finding. But see, e.g.,
       id., at *9 (“[E]ven where an applicant’s explanations for implausible
       aspects of his claim are tenable—e.g., explanations for inconsisten-
       cies and omissions—that alone generally does not compel a reason-
       able fact-finder to reverse an adverse credibility determination.”).
       Still, Santais’s claims fail because his state convictions are “particu-
       larly serious,” and the immigration judge’s finding that Santais
       would not likely be tortured if returned to Haiti is supported by
       substantial evidence.
                       A. Asylum & Withholding of Removal
              A conviction for a “particularly serious crime” bars a noncit-
       izen’s asylum and withholding of removal claims. See 8 USC
       §§ 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii), 1231(b)(3)(B)(ii). An immigration judge may
       make an individualized determination that a conviction was for a
       “particularly serious crime.” See K.Y., 43 F.4th at 1187.
              Liberally construing Santais’s pleadings, he appears to chal-
       lenge the immigration judge’s individualized determination that
       his convictions were for “particularly serious crimes.” This pre-
       sents a legal issue over which we have jurisdiction. See id. at 1185–
       87.
USCA11 Case: 22-10567       Document: 22-1      Date Filed: 02/03/2023      Page: 6 of 8

       6                       Opinion of the Court                   22-10567

               Santais’s convictions qualify as particularly serious. He was
       convicted of crimes “directed at a person” and received a lengthy
       eleven-year aggregate sentence. See id. at 1188 (finding a crime’s
       seriousness “reflected by the lengthy 42-month sentence”). Santais
       pointed a gun at his female supervisor’s head and intentionally
       punched her “in the face,” causing “visible bodily harm.” “Add that
       all up, and the details . . . easily allow an inference” that his convic-
       tions were for particularly serious crimes. Id. (quotation omitted).
       Santais’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
               Santais disputes details of his altercation with his supervisor,
       but we must dismiss those factual challenges for lack of jurisdic-
       tion. If a noncitizen is found removable for an “aggravated felony”
       conviction, we only have jurisdiction to review his or her asylum
       and withholding of removal claims for legal, not factual, error. See
       8 U.S.C. §§ 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), 1252(a)(2)(C)–(D); see also Nasrallah
       v. Barr, 140 S. Ct. 1683, 1687–88 (2020). That’s the case here. The
       immigration judge found Santais’s battery conviction—a crime of
       violence for which the term of imprisonment was at least one
       year—qualified as an “aggravated felony.” See id. 8 U.S.C §
       1101(a)(43)(F); Talamantes-Enriquez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 12 F.4th
       1340, 1351–52 (11th Cir. 2021) (explaining that Georgia misde-
       meanor simple battery based on physical contact causing harm to
       the victim—a lesser offense than felony battery itself—is a crime of
       violence), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 1119 (2022). Stripped down, San-
       tais’s factual challenges are collateral attacks on his state convic-
       tions’ validity. But a “petition for review of an agency’s
USCA11 Case: 22-10567       Document: 22-1      Date Filed: 02/03/2023      Page: 7 of 8

       22-10567                Opinion of the Court                           7

       immigration determination is not the correct forum” for such at-
       tacks. Gelin v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 837 F.3d 1236, 1247 (11th Cir. 2016).
                                  B. The Convention
               To qualify for convention protection, a noncitizen must “es-
       tablish that it is more likely than not that he or she would be tor-
       tured if removed to the proposed country of removal.” Reyes-
       Sanchez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 369 F.3d 1239, 1242 (11th Cir. 2004)
       (quoting 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2)). The torture must be “by or at the
       instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public offi-
       cial acting in an official capacity or other person acting in an official
       capacity.” Id. (quoting 8 C.F.R. § 208.18(a)(1)). Unlike Santais’s
       asylum and withholding of removal claims, we can review his con-
       vention claim for factual error. Priva v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 34 F.4th
       946, 957 (11th Cir. 2022).
              Nothing in the record compels us to reverse the immigra-
       tion judge’s finding that Santais didn’t show that, if returned to
       Haiti, he’d more likely than not be tortured by or with the acqui-
       escence of the Haitian government. Santais testified that the Aris-
       tide government ended nearly two decades ago, and, as the immi-
       gration judge found, the record lacks evidence that the current Hai-
       tian government would more likely than not participate in or ac-
       quiesce to his torture. The state department human rights report
       doesn’t mention former President Aristide or his supporters or oth-
       erwise link them to the current Haitian government. Nor does the
       report identify United States government collaborators as individ-
       uals facing particular danger in Haiti.
USCA11 Case: 22-10567    Document: 22-1     Date Filed: 02/03/2023   Page: 8 of 8

       8                     Opinion of the Court               22-10567

                              IV.    CONCLUSION
             The petition’s constitutional arguments and factual chal-
       lenges to the state convictions are dismissed. The petition’s asy-
       lum, withholding of removal, and convention claims are denied.
             PETITION DISMISSED IN PART, DENIED IN PART.