Summary
The Eleventh Circuit dismissed Winston Lloyd Hayles’s petition for review for lack of jurisdiction. The court held that a petition challenging only the denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture does not invoke jurisdiction unless it also challenges a final order of removal. A partial dissent would have treated a CAT challenge as necessarily implicating the execution of the final removal order.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Eleventh Circuit has jurisdiction to review the denial of CAT relief when the petition for review does not challenge an underlying final order of removal.
- Whether Hayles's pro se petition can be liberally construed as challenging the final removal order.
- Whether Hayles could amend his petition through appellate briefing or by formal amendment to add a challenge to the final removal order.
Holdings
- A court of appeals may review the denial of CAT relief only when the petition for review also challenges a final order of removal; it lacks jurisdiction over a petition directed solely at the denial of CAT relief.
- Hayles's petition did not challenge the final administrative removal order because it referred specifically to the November 8, 2023 CAT decision and raised arguments concerning only the likelihood and circumstances of torture.
- A petitioner cannot amend a petition for review by adding claims in appellate briefing, and the requested amendment would be denied where the proposed challenge to the removal order is frivolous and cannot invoke jurisdiction.
Key quotations
“The upshot is that we cannot review the denial of CAT relief unless there is a petition for review of a final removal order.” (9)
“We thus hold that judicial review of the denial of relief under the CAT is available only if a petition for review challenges a final removal order.” (10)
“Nothing about the attorney list would have changed the outcome of Hayles’s removal proceedings.” (16)
Factual background
Hayles unlawfully entered the United States and was later convicted in Georgia of voluntary manslaughter, battery, and other crimes, receiving a 20-year sentence. Because of his aggravated-felony convictions, DHS initiated administrative removal proceedings and issued a final administrative removal order. Hayles sought CAT protection in separate withholding-only proceedings, asserting that he would likely be tortured in Jamaica, but the immigration judge and Board of Immigration Appeals denied relief. His pro se petition for review challenged the CAT denial, not the underlying removal order, and he was deported while the petition was pending.
Procedural history
Hayles, a Jamaican citizen convicted of aggravated felonies, was placed in administrative removal proceedings and separately pursued deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. An immigration judge denied CAT relief, and the Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed on November 8, 2023. DHS had issued a final administrative removal order on July 13, 2023. Hayles petitioned for review, but his petition challenged only the CAT decision and did not challenge the final removal order. The Eleventh Circuit dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction.