Camey-Miranda v. Ashcroft

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
March 23, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-60971
Summary Calendar
GERMAIN MANUEL CAMEY-MIRANDA,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A75-903-238
--------------------
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Germain Manuel Camey-Miranda petitions for review of an order
of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the Immigration
Judge’s decision to deny his application for cancellation of
removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act. Camey contests
the merits of the BIA’s decisions that he was statutorily
ineligible for cancellation of removal on the ground of moral
character and because he failed to demonstrate the requisite

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 02-60971
-2-
hardship. The Respondent contends that Camey’s petition should be
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the BIA’s determinations
on hardship and moral character are discretionary determinations
precluding judicial review.
This court does not have jurisdiction to review the
Immigration Judge’s discretionary determination that Camey’s
children would not suffer an “exceptional and extremely unusual
hardship” if Camey were deported to Guatemala. See 8 U.S.C.
§ 1229b(b)(1)(D); 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(2)(B)(I); Bravo v. Ashcroft, 341
F.3d 590, 592 (5th Cir. 2003). Because the Immigration Judge’s
determination on hardship is fatal to Camey’s application, and that
determination is not reviewable, it is unnecessary to address the
Immigration Judge’s finding on moral character.
PETITION DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --