Davis v. Garland, No. 23-1229 (8th Cir. 2024)
Annotate this Case
In this case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reviewed the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision to deny Peter David Davis's appeal to reopen his case. Davis, a Liberian citizen, was admitted as an asylee to the United States in 2008. However, following multiple criminal convictions, his asylum status was terminated and removal proceedings were initiated. Davis conceded his removability but requested a waiver of inadmissibility for humanitarian purposes, which was denied. His appeal to the BIA was also unsuccessful.
On appeal to the Court of Appeals, Davis argued that the BIA erred by not providing a reasoned explanation for its application of the motion-to-reopen standard. The Court of Appeals agreed, stating that the BIA's single sentence explanation did not meet the requirements for reasoned decision-making, as it did not explain how the elements of a motion to reopen applied to Davis's case. The Court held that the BIA's decision was an abuse of discretion as it was without rational explanation and failed to consider all factors presented by Davis. Consequently, the Court granted Davis's petition for review and remanded the case back to the BIA for further proceedings. However, the Court did not address Davis's other arguments regarding due process and competency as they were related to the request to submit new evidence, which would be considered upon remand.
Court Description: [Benton, Author, with Colloton and Wollman, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. On remand from the Board of Immigration Appeals, the IJ failed to reference petitioner's motion to reopen or the standard for considering it, and the BIA erred in affirming the decision; without an adequate explanation, this court cannot conduct a meaningful review of the Boards's order; petitioner also has a separate petition for review the Board's denial of his motion to reconsider its order; in light of the grant of the petition for review of the Board's order, the court denies the petition to review the denial of the request for reconsideration; remanded for further proceedings.
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.