Anthony J. Rankine, Petitioner, v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Service, Respondent, 914 F.2d 248 (4th Cir. 1990)
Annotate this CaseOn Petition for Review of an Order of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. (A-23-656-284)
Anthony J. Rankine, petitioner pro se.
Donald E. Keener, Robert Leigh Bombaugh, Stewart Deutsch, David John Kline, Office of Immigration Litigation, United States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., William Kummings, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
I.N.S.
AFFIRMED.
PER CURIAM:
Anthony J. Rankine petitions for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Pursuant to 8 C.F.R. Sec. 3.1(d) (1-a) (i), the Board summarily dismissed Rankine's appeal of an immigration judge's order that he be deported. In his notice of appeal to the Board, Rankine identified only conclusory reasons that would justify the Board's overturning the immigration judge's decision. Further, Rankine failed to file with the Board a brief in which he might have set forth his position in detail. Under these circumstances, the summary dismissal of his appeal was entirely appropriate. See Athehortua-Vanegas v. INS, 876 F.2d 238, 240-41 (1st Cir. 1989). As the dispositive issue recently has been decided authoritatively, we dispense with oral argument. The decision of the Board is affirmed.*
AFFIRMED.
Any allegations concerning counsel's performance rendering the proceedings fundamentally unfair should be raised in a motion to reopen and for stay of deportation filed with the Board. See Lozada v. INS, 8576 F.2d 10 (1st Cir. 1988); Matter of Lozada, Interim Decision No. 3059 (BIA Apr. 13, 1988)
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
