Samba v. Ashcroft , 82 F. App'x 858 ( 2003 )


Menu:
  •                           UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    BERNARD TITTI SAMBA,                      
    Petitioner,
    v.
            No. 03-1267
    JOHN ASHCROFT, United States
    Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    
    On Petition for Review of an Order
    of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
    (A78-353-376)
    Submitted: December 10, 2003
    Decided: December 23, 2003
    Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    COUNSEL
    Randall L. Johnson, JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, P.C., for Peti-
    tioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, Mark C. Walters,
    Assistant Director, James E. Grimes, Office of Immigration Litiga-
    tion, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
    D.C., for Respondent.
    2                         SAMBA v. ASHCROFT
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Bernard Titti Samba, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions
    for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ("Board")
    affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge’s denial of his
    applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under
    the Convention Against Torture. For the reasons discussed below, we
    deny the petition for review.
    In his petition, Samba first challenges the immigration judge’s
    determination that he failed to establish his 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 Samba fails
    to show the evidence compels a contrary result.
    Additionally, we uphold the immigration judge’s denial of Samba’s
    applications for withholding of removal and protection under the
    Convention Against Torture, both of which require the applicant to
    make a more stringent showing to qualify for relief. To qualify for
    withholding of removal, an applicant must demonstrate "a clear prob-
    ability of persecution." INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 
    480 U.S. 421
    , 430-
    31 (1987). To obtain relief under the Convention Against Torture, an
    applicant must establish that "it is more likely than not that he or she
    would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal." 
    8 C.F.R. § 1208.16
    (c)(2) (2003). Because Samba fails to show he is eli-
    gible for asylum, he cannot meet the higher standards for withholding
    of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
    Finally, Samba contends he was denied due process because the
    Board failed to consider on appeal new evidence not raised before the
    immigration judge. We find this claim is without merit.
    SAMBA v. ASHCROFT                         3
    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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 03-1267

Citation Numbers: 82 F. App'x 858

Judges: Wilkinson, Michael, King

Filed Date: 12/23/2003

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024