Tatyana v. Mironova v. INS , 20 F. App'x 599 ( 2001 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 00-3221
    ___________
    Tatyana Vladimirovna Mironova;           *
    Genadiy L. Mironov; Anna                 *
    Genadievna Mironova; Anton               *
    Gennakyevito Mironov,                    *
    *
    Petitioners,         * On Petition for Review from
    * Immigration and Naturalization
    v.                                 * Service.
    *
    Immigration and Naturalization           *      [UNPUBLISHED]
    Service; Curtis J. Aljets, District      *
    Director, St. Paul, Minnesota INS;       *
    Janet Reno, Attorney General of the      *
    United States,                           *
    *
    Respondents.         *
    ___________
    Submitted: May 16, 2001
    Filed: October 18, 2001
    ___________
    Before LOKEN, JOHN R. GIBSON, and FAGG, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Tatyana Vladimirovna Mironova, her husband, and two children (collectively
    the Mironovas) are citizens of Ukraine. They applied to the Immigration and
    Naturalization Service (INS) for asylum and withholding of deportation asserting they
    have a well-founded fear of persecution in Ukraine based on their religious beliefs.
    An immigration judge rejected their assertion because of inconsistencies between the
    Mironovas first and second asylum applications. The Board of Immigration Appeals
    (BIA) denied their appeal, noting the IJ rejected the Mironovas testimony about
    persecution as incredible. The BIA also held that even if the testimony was credible,
    the application would fail anyway because religious freedom is no longer denied in
    Ukraine since the 1991 overthrow of the Communist regime. The BIA concluded the
    Mironovas lacked a well-founded fear of persecution based on their religion and thus
    did not qualify for asylum or withholding of deportation. The Mironovas petition for
    review and, having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude substantial evidence
    supports the BIA's factual findings and the BIA did not abuse its discretion in
    denying asylum and withholding of deportation. Valioukevitch v. INS, 
    251 F.3d 747
    ,
    749-50 (8th Cir. 2001). We deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the
    BIA. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    A true copy.
    Attest:
    CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 00-3221

Citation Numbers: 20 F. App'x 599

Filed Date: 10/18/2001

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023