Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Mekonin v. Ashcroft, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Serkalem Teferi Mekonin's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming the Immigration Judge's denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal. The Court found that Mekonin failed to show that the evidence compels a conclusion contrary to the Immigration Judge's determination that she did not establish eligibility for asylum. As the standard for withholding of removal is more stringent than asylum, the Court also upheld the denial of withholding of removal since Mekonin could not satisfy the higher standard required. Therefore, the Court denied Mekonin's petition for review.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2005-01-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 04-1407

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Serkalem Teferi Mekonin's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming the Immigration Judge's denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal. The Court found that Mekonin failed to show that the evidence compels a conclusion contrary to the Immigration Judge's determination that she did not establish eligibility for asylum. As the standard for withholding of removal is more stringent than asylum, the Court also upheld the denial of withholding of removal since Mekonin could not satisfy the higher standard required. Therefore, the Court denied Mekonin's petition for review.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    2 views3 pages

    Mekonin v. Ashcroft, 4th Cir. (2005)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied Serkalem Teferi Mekonin's petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' decision affirming the Immigration Judge's denial of her application for asylum and withholding of removal. The Court found that Mekonin failed to show that the evidence compels a conclusion contrary to the Immigration Judge's determination that she did not establish eligibility for asylum. As the standard for withholding of removal is more stringent than asylum, the Court also upheld the denial of withholding of removal since Mekonin could not satisfy the higher standard required. Therefore, the Court denied Mekonin's petition for review.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 04-1407

    SERKALEM TEFERI MEKONIN,


    Petitioner,
    versus
    JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General,
    Respondent.

    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration


    Appeals. (A95-079-669)

    Submitted: November 10, 2004

    Decided:

    January 12, 2005

    Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    James A. Roberts, LAW OFFICE OF JAMES A. ROBERTS, Falls Church,


    Virginia, for Petitioner.
    Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney
    General, Earle B. Wilson, Anthony W. Norwood, Office of Immigration
    Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.,
    for Respondent.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Serkalem
    Ethiopia,

    Teferi

    petitions

    Immigration

    Appeals

    for

    Mekonin,
    review

    (Board)

    of

    native

    an

    order

    affirming,

    and
    of

    citizen

    the

    without

    of

    Board

    opinion,

    of
    the

    Immigration Judges (IJ) denial of her application for asylum and


    withholding of removal.
    Because the Board affirmed under its streamlined process,
    the IJs decision is the final agency determination. See Camara v.
    Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 361, 366 (4th Cir. 2004).

    A determination that

    an alien is not eligible for asylum must be upheld unless that


    determination

    is

    manifestly

    1252(b)(4)(C) (2000).

    contrary

    to

    law.

    U.S.C.

    We will reverse only if the evidence

    presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could


    fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.

    Rusu v. INS, 296

    F.3d 316, 325 n.14 (4th Cir. 2002) (quoting Huaman-Cornelio v. BIA,
    979

    F.2d

    995,

    omitted)).

    999

    (4th

    Cir.

    (internal

    quotation

    marks

    We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude

    that Mekonin fails to show


    result.

    1992)

    that the evidence compels a contrary

    Accordingly, we cannot grant the relief Mekonin seeks.


    Next, we uphold the IJs denial of Mekonins application

    for withholding of removal.

    The standard for withholding of

    removal is more stringent than that for asylum eligibility.


    Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999).

    An applicant for

    withholding must demonstrate a clear probability of persecution.

    - 2 -

    INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987).

    As Mekonin

    failed to establish refugee status, she cannot satisfy the higher


    standard necessary for withholding.
    Accordingly,

    we

    deny

    the

    petition

    for

    review.

    We

    dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
    are adequately presented in the materials before the court and
    argument would not aid the decisional process.
    PETITION DENIED

    - 3 -

    You might also like