From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hamade v. Ashcroft

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 30, 2002
45 F. App'x 749 (9th Cir. 2002)

Opinion


45 Fed.Appx. 749 (9th Cir. 2002) Khalil Amine HAMADE, aka Khyle Amine Hamade, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent. No. 00-70413, 01-70837. INS No. A94-390-771. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. August 30, 2002

Submitted August 15, 2002 .

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Before KOZINSKI and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges, and FITZGERALD, District Judge.

The Honorable James M. Fitzgerald, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Alaska, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Khalil Hamade petitions for review of three Board of Immigration Appeals decisions denying him withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A) and under the Convention Against Torture, and declining to reopen his case. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, because Hamade was not adjudged removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i) or any provision dependent upon a prior conviction. "[T]he INS' mere allegation that a crime was committed is insufficient to bar appellate jurisdiction." Hernandez-Montiel v. INS, 225 F.3d 1084, 1090 (9th Cir.2000).

United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, as implemented by the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 section 2242, Pub.L. No. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998).

Having reviewed the record, and in light of the Board's determination that Hamade complied with all procedural requirements, we hold that the Board abused its discretion in refusing to reopen the case to consider the material evidence he presented. See 8 C.F.R. § 3.2(c)(1); Rodriguez-Lariz v. INS, 282 F.3d 1218, 1222 (9th Cir.2002) (standard of review). We therefore remand with a direction to reopen the case to consider the new evidence. In light of this determination, we need not address the remaining issues on appeal.

PETITION GRANTED and REMANDED.


Summaries of

Hamade v. Ashcroft

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Aug 30, 2002
45 F. App'x 749 (9th Cir. 2002)
Case details for

Hamade v. Ashcroft

Case Details

Full title:Khalil Amine HAMADE, aka Khyle Amine Hamade, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Aug 30, 2002

Citations

45 F. App'x 749 (9th Cir. 2002)