Kithongo v. Garland

Ct. of Appeals lacked jurisdiction to consider Board’s denial of petitioner’s applications for adjustment of status and withholding of removal after petitioner overstayed his visa and after petitioner was convicted on Indiana charge of conspiracy to commit robbery, where: (1) petitioner’s application for adjustment of status was denied in part as matter of discretion, and petitioner otherwise was unable to identify legal or constitutional issue arising out of Board’s denial; and (2) Board’s denial of petitioner’s application for withholding of removal was based on finding that petitioner’s underlying conviction on Indiana charge of conspiracy to commit robbery was particularly serious, where immigration judge applied case-by-case approach that weighed factors particular to petitioner. As such, Ct. of Appeal lacked jurisdiction to essentially re-weigh factors used by Board to determine that petitioner’s conviction was particularly serious. Also, Ct. of Appeals denied petitioner’s petition for review with respect to Board’s denial of petitioner’s application for relief under Convention Against Torture, where petitioner failed to raise with Board his arguments that he raised on appeal.