Sohail Mayan v. U.S. Attorney General

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 19-15058
________________________
Agency No. A027-385-829
SOHAIL MAYAN,
Petitioner,
versus
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
________________________
Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
________________________
(March 30, 2021)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judge, and SELF,∗
District Judge.
∗ Honorable Tilman Eugene Self III, United States District Judge for the Middle District
of Georgia, sitting by designation.
USCA11 Case: 19-15058 Date Filed: 03/30/2021 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Sohail Mayan has petitioned for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals
(“BIA”) decision denying his application for cancellation of removal from the
United States and ordering removal. The BIA concluded that Mayan failed to
prove he had not been convicted of an “aggravated felony,” 8 U.S.C.
§ 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii), because the record of his Florida marijuana conviction was
inconclusive as to whether the crime he committed was such a felony. Thus, the
BIA found him ineligible for cancellation of removal. Id. § 1229b(b)(1)(C).
Mayan petitioned this Court for review, arguing that in the face of such ambiguity
the BIA should have presumed his conviction was for the least of the acts the
Florida statute criminalized, a determination that would have made him eligible for
the relief he sought.
After we ordered that the case be orally argued, the United States Supreme
Court held that a petitioner in Mayan’s shoes—whose record of conviction is
ambiguous as to whether the conviction was for an aggravated felony—has failed
to meet his burden of proof to demonstrate he is eligible for cancellation of
removal. See Pereida v. Wilkinson, 141 S. Ct. 754 (2021). Because Pereida
controls the outcome of this case, we deny Mayan’s petition.
PETITION DENIED.
USCA11 Case: 19-15058 Date Filed: 03/30/2021 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --