Szabo v. INS

                 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT



                              No. 98-60018
                            Summary Calendar



ZOLTAN SZABO,

                                             Petitioner,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION
SERVICE,

                                             Respondent..

                           - - - - - - - - - -
                  Petition for Review of an Order of
                    the Board of Immigration Appeals
                          USDC No. A70-802-521
                           - - - - - - - - - -
                            November 17, 1998

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Zoltan Szabo, an ethnic Hungarian who is a native and citizen

of Romania, has petitioned this court to review the Board of

Immigration     Appeal’s   (BIA)   determination   that    he   should   be

deported.      We DENY Szabo’s petition.       The BIA’s decision was

supported by “reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on

the record considered as a whole.”       Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78

F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996).




     *
        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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
                                 No. 98-60018
                                      -2-

     Assuming    Szabo    has     established    that     he    was    previously

persecuted in Romania, State Department documents introduced in

Szabo’s immigration proceedings were sufficient to overcome the

presumption that he has a reasonable fear of present or future

persecution.    See 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(1)(i); Vaduva v. INS, 131

F.3d 689,     691-92   (7th    Cir.   1997).     The    BIA    did    not   err   in

determining    that    Szabo    was   not   entitled    to    asylum   under      the

doctrine articulated in Matter of Chen, 20 I&N Dec. 16 (BIA April

25, 1989), and its factual determinations in ruling on this matter

were supported by substantial evidence.            See Rivera-Cruz v. INS,

948 F.2d 962, 969 (5th Cir. 1991).

     PETITION DENIED.