The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has denied a petition for review challenging the removal of Nyynkpao Banyee, an Ivory Coast native who immigrated to the United States as a child refugee more than two decades ago. The January 29, 2026 ruling in *Banyee v. Bondi* upholds the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision to proceed with Banyee's deportation based on criminal convictions, including a 2018 robbery conviction.
Banyee's case represents the intersection of immigration law and criminal justice, highlighting how criminal convictions can lead to removal proceedings even for individuals who entered the United States legally as refugees. The petitioner came to the United States from the Ivory Coast in 2004 as a child refugee and obtained lawful permanent resident status the following year in 2005.
According to court records, Banyee's legal troubles began as an adult when he "committed a string of crimes." The conviction that proved most consequential for his immigration status was a 2018 robbery conviction under North Dakota Century Code § 12.1-22-01. The court noted that Banyee "brandished a gun" and menaced others while committing theft, making his robbery a Class B felony under North Dakota law. He received a sentence of four years' imprisonment with one year of probation.
The Department of Homeland Security arrested Banyee in 2021, initiating removal proceedings on multiple grounds. DHS charged him with removability under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(ii) for two separate convictions of crimes involving moral turpitude, and under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) for the state robbery conviction. The agency argued that his robbery conviction constituted an aggravated felony for "attempted theft" as defined under federal immigration law.
The case proceeded through the immigration court system, where an Immigration Judge initially heard Banyee's case. Following an adverse ruling at the trial level, Banyee appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, the administrative appellate body that reviews immigration court decisions. The BIA dismissed his appeal, upholding the removal order issued by the Immigration Court.
Banyee then filed a petition for review with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, seeking judicial review of the BIA's decision. The three-judge panel consisting of Circuit Judges Loken, Benton, and Shepherd heard the case, with Judge Benton writing the opinion for the court. The case was submitted to the court on October 23, 2025, and the decision was filed on January 29, 2026.
The Eighth Circuit exercised jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, which governs judicial review of removal orders. However, the court ultimately denied Banyee's petition for review, effectively upholding the immigration authorities' decision to proceed with his removal from the United States.
The case illustrates the harsh consequences that criminal convictions can have for non-citizens, even those who entered the United States legally and have been lawful permanent residents for extended periods. Under federal immigration law, certain criminal convictions can render individuals deportable, regardless of their immigration history or ties to the United States.
The concept of "crimes involving moral turpitude" has particular significance in immigration law, as convictions for such offenses can trigger removal proceedings. Similarly, convictions classified as "aggravated felonies" under federal immigration law carry severe immigration consequences, often barring individuals from various forms of relief from removal.
Banyee's case also highlights the challenges faced by individuals who came to the United States as refugees. While refugee status provides protection from persecution and a pathway to permanent residence, subsequent criminal activity can ultimately lead to removal from the country that once provided sanctuary.
The timing of the case, with Attorney General Pamela Bondi named as respondent, reflects the ongoing enforcement priorities of federal immigration authorities. The case was processed through the final stages of the judicial system during a period when immigration enforcement remained a significant focus of federal policy.
The denial of Banyee's petition for review means that the removal order against him stands, and immigration authorities may proceed with his deportation to the Ivory Coast. The ruling also establishes precedent within the Eighth Circuit's jurisdiction regarding similar cases involving criminal convictions and immigration consequences.
For immigration practitioners and advocates, the case serves as a reminder of the importance of understanding the immigration consequences of criminal convictions and the limited options available for judicial review once removal proceedings reach the federal appellate level. The intersection of criminal law and immigration law continues to create complex legal challenges for individuals navigating both systems simultaneously.