Whiskey Badidi v. Jefferson Sessions, III, No. 15-60834 (5th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 15-60834 Document: 00513953443 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/14/2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 15-60834 Summary Calendar FILED April 14, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk WHISKEY J. BADIDI, also known as Augustine Weyee, also known as Whiskey Badidi, also known as Weyee Augustine, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A075 426 416 Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Whiskey J. Badidi, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for review of a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) order pretermitting cancellation of removal and decision ordering removal. We review the decision of the BIA and will consider the IJ’s decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA. Shaikh v. Holder, Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 15-60834 Document: 00513953443 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/14/2017 No. 15-60834 588 F.3d 861, 863 (5th Cir. 2009). This court reviews the BIA’s legal conclusions de novo and its findings of fact for substantial evidence. See Efe v. Ashcroft, 293 F.3d 899, 903 (5th Cir. 2002). The BIA affirmed the IJ’s determination that Badidi was removable because he fraudulently or willfully misrepresented a material fact on his application for adjustment of status. The BIA also affirmed the IJ’s determination that Badidi was not eligible for cancellation of removal as a permanent resident because he never obtained permanent resident status and that Badidi was not eligible for cancellation of removal as a nonpermanent resident because his 2003 conviction for assault on a peace officer was a crime involving moral turpitude for which a sentence of one year or longer may be imposed. Badidi’s brief fails to identify and brief any argument challenging these reasons for finding him removable and ineligible for relief from removal. Accordingly, these issues are deemed abandoned. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003) (per curiam); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, Badidi’s petition for review is DENIED. 2
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.
