William Goulbourne v. U.S. Attorney General


USCA11 Case: 21-14505 Date Filed: 10/18/2022 Page: 1 of 11 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-14505 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ WILLIAM GOULBOURNE, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A029-839-853 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 21-14505 Date Filed: 10/18/2022 Page: 2 of 11 2 Opinion of the Court 21-14505 Before WILSON, NEWSOM and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: William Goulbourne, a lawful permanent resident and citi- zen of Jamaica, petitions for review of the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) and Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denials of his ap- plication for cancellation of removal. I Goulbourne was convicted of possession with intent to dis- tribute 3, 4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) under the Georgia Controlled Substance Act, Ga. Code Ann. § 16-13- 30(b); id. § 16-13-25(3)(Z) (listing MDMA under Schedule I con- trolled substances). “The [INA] allows the government to deport noncitizens who are convicted of certain crimes while in the United States, including drug offenses.” Donawa v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 735 F.3d 1275, 1278–79 (11th Cir. 2013) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)). “Or- dinarily, a deportable noncitizen may ask the Attorney General for discretionary relief from removal. But if that noncitizen has been convicted of an aggravated felony, he is not only deportable; he is also ineligible for any discretionary relief.” Id. at 1279 (citations omitted); Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) § 237(a)(2)(A)(iii); 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii); 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(3). 1 The term “aggravated felony” includes a conviction 1 The INA also defines the term “aggravated felony” to include “illicit traffick- ing in a controlled substance . . . including a drug trafficking crime (as defined USCA11 Case: 21-14505 Date Filed: 10/18/2022 Page: 3 of 11 21-14505 Opinion of the Court 3 for a “drug trafficking” crime, which is defined as any felony pun- ishable under the federal Controlled Substances Act (CSA). INA § 101(a)(43)(B), 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(43)(B); 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(2). A state offense qualifies as a federal aggravated felony only if it pro- scribes conduct punishable as a felony under federal law. Lopez v. Gonzalez, 549 U.S. 47, 55–60 (2006). Courts analyzing whether a conviction under a state statute qualifies as an aggravated felony apply a categorical or modified categorial approach, depending on the statutory scheme. See Donawa, 735 F.3d at 1280. Using the categorical approach, a court may examine only the statutory elements of the state and federal crimes to determine whether the state crime “categorically fits within the generic federal definition of a corresponding aggravated felony.” Moncrieffe v. Holder, 569 U.S. 184, 190 (2013) (internal quotations omitted). But courts should also consider whether the state statute is “divisible,” or whether it “lists a number of alterna- tive elements that effectively create several different crimes.” Guil- len v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 910 F.3d 1174, 1180 (11th Cir. 2018) (quoting Donawa, 735 F.3d at 1281). If the statute is divisible, then the court may apply the modified categorical …

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