Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Hugues Denver AKASSY, aka Hugues Akassy, aka Huguesdenver Akassy, aka Hugues Denver Ahua Akassy, aka Hugues Denvers Ahua, aka Hugues Denver Akassy, aka Hugues-Denver Akassy, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, United States Attorney General, Respondent.
Petitioner Hugues Denver Akassy, a native and citizen of the Ivory Coast, seeks review of a January 24, 2019, decision of the BIA affirming an August 28, 2018, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Akassy a continuance and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Hugues Denver Akassy, No. A088 440 540 (B.I.A. Jan. 24, 2019), aff'g No. A088 440 540 (Immig. Ct. Fishkill Aug. 28, 2018). We assume the parties' familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history.
We have reviewed both the IJ's and the BIA's opinions “for the sake of completeness.” Wangchuck v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 448 F.3d 524, 528 (2d Cir. 2006). Our jurisdiction is limited to constitutional claims and questions of law because Akassy is removable by reason of having been convicted of an aggravated felony. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(C), (D); see also Ortiz-Franco v. Holder, 782 F.3d 81, 91 (2d Cir. 2015). We review such claims de novo. Pierre v. Gonzales, 502 F.3d 109, 113 (2d Cir. 2007).
The IJ's denial of a request for a continuance does not ordinarily implicate a constitutional claim or question of law over which the Court retains jurisdiction because “IJs are accorded wide latitude in calendar management,” and we review such decisions “under a highly deferential standard of abuse of discretion.” Morgan v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 549, 551 (2d Cir. 2006). The IJ did not err in denying continuances pending resolution of Akassy's state habeas petition because the convictions underlying his removal order were final for immigration purposes despite his pending petition. See Montilla v. INS, 926 F.2d 162, 164 (2d Cir. 1991); Matter of J.M. Acosta, 27 I. & N. Dec. 420, 432 (BIA 2018); In re Ponce De Leon-Ruiz, 21 I. & N. Dec. 154, 157 (BIA 1996).
We do not consider Akassy's CAT claim because he does not raise it in his brief. See Yueqing Zhang v. Gonzales, 426 F.3d 540, 541 n.1, 545 n.7 (2d Cir. 2005).
For the foregoing reasons, the petition for review is DENIED. All pending motions and applications are DENIED and stays VACATED.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 19-450
Decided: December 19, 2019
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)