Beshir v. Holder

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-2106

SHITU MOHAMMED BESHIR,

Petitioner,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General,

Respondent.

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

Submitted: August 19, 2010 Decided: September 10, 2010

Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Alan M. Parra, LAW OFFICE OF ALAN M. PARRA, Silver Spring,
Maryland, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General,
Anthony C. Payne, Senior Litigation Counsel, Lauren E. Fascett,
Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Shitu Mohammed Beshir, a native and citizen of

Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of

Immigration Appeals affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of

her applications for relief from removal.

Beshir first challenges the determination that she

failed to establish eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal

of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien

“must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that

no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear

of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84

(1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude

that Beshir fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary

result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Beshir cannot meet

the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. Chen v.

INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca,

480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). Finally, we uphold the finding below

that Beshir failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than

not that she would be tortured if removed to Ethiopia. 8 C.F.R.

§ 1208.16(c)(2) (2010).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

2
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

3