Mariusz Tomaszczuk v. Matthew Whitaker


RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 18a0254p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT MARIUSZ TOMASZCZUK, ┐ Petitioner, │ │ > No. 17-4229 v. │ │ │ MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting Attorney General, │ Respondent. │ ┘ On Petition for Review from the Board of Immigration Appeals; No. A 205 859 732. Argued: October 18, 2018 Decided and Filed: November 20, 2018 Before: KEITH, CLAY, and NALBANDIAN, Circuit Judges. _________________ COUNSEL ARGUED: Jeremy Liss, PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON, LLP, New York, New York, for Petitioner. Aimee J. Carmichael, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. ON BRIEF: Jeremy Liss, Aidan Synnott, Nora Ahmed, PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON, LLP, New York, New York, George P. Mann, Maris J. Liss, GEORGE P. MANN AND ASSOCIATES, Farmington Hills, Michigan, for Petitioner. Justin R. Markel, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. _________________ OPINION _________________ CLAY, Circuit Judge. Petitioner Mariusz Tomaszczuk petitions this Court to review the November 3, 2017, Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), dismissing No. 17-4229 Tomaszczuk v. Whitaker Page 2 Petitioner’s appeal of the May 15, 2017, Order of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying his application for cancellation of removal. Petitioner was denied relief pursuant to 8 U.S.C. §§ 1101(f)(1) and 1229b(b)(1). For the reasons set forth below, we DENY the petition for review. BACKGROUND Petitioner is a native and citizen of Poland. Petitioner’s wife is a lawful permanent resident of the United States, and she and Petitioner have a son who is a United States citizen. Petitioner last entered the United States, to remain, in April 1999. The Department of Homeland Security commenced removal proceedings against Petitioner on October 14, 2016, by filing with the immigration court a notice to appear, charging Petitioner with being removable pursuant to 8 U.S.C § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i) as an alien present in the United States without being admitted or paroled. On April 4, 2017, Petitioner filed an application for cancellation of removal. Petitioner’s hearing before an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) took place on May 8, 2017, at which Petitioner, his wife, and his son testified. On May 15, 2017, the IJ issued an order denying Petitioner’s application. The IJ’s order found that Petitioner was a “habitual drunkard” under 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)(1) and was therefore unable to prove that he was a person of “good moral character” during the ten-year period prior to his application, as is required under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1) to be eligible for cancellation of removal. The IJ relied on evidence that Petitioner had been convicted five times on drunk driving charges and once as a “Disorderly Person” related to being drunk in public. This latter conviction and two of the drunk driving convictions were within the ten-year period before Petitioner’s application, while three of the drunk driving convictions fell outside this period. The IJ cited Petitioner’s high blood alcohol content levels at the time of his arrests as evidence of Petitioner’s high ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals