M. Mejia-Gutierrez v. John Ashcroft , 90 F. App'x 195 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                      United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 03-1676
    ___________
    Maria Mejia-Gutierrez,                   *
    *
    Petitioner,                 *
    * Petition for Review of an
    v.                                 * Order of the Board
    * of Immigration Appeals.
    John Ashcroft,                           *
    *    [UNPUBLISHED]
    Respondent.                 *
    ___________
    Submitted: March 1, 2004
    Filed: March 18, 2004
    ___________
    Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Maria Mejia-Gutierrez (Mejia-Gutierrez), a citizen of Guatemala, petitions for
    review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming an Immigration
    Judge’s (IJ’s) denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief
    under the Convention Against Torture. After careful review of the record, we deny
    the petition because substantial evidence supports the IJ’s factual findings, and the
    evidence does not compel reversal. See Navarijo-Barrios v. Ashcroft, 
    322 F.3d 561
    ,
    562 (8th Cir. 2003) (standard of review). Mejia-Gutierrez sought asylum based on
    past persecution and fear of future persecution on account of political opinion, but she
    produced no evidence that the guerrillas who attempted to recruit her did so because
    of any particular political opinion she held. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 
    502 U.S. 478
    ,
    482 (1992). Further, the government presented evidence of changed conditions in
    Guatemala, including that the 1996 peace accords had ended the civil war, and that
    former guerrillas had become a recognized political party. See Melecio-Saquil v.
    Ashcroft, 
    337 F.3d 983
    , 986-87 (8th Cir. 2003).
    As Mejia-Gutierrez did not establish a clear probability of persecution or a
    likelihood of torture upon her return to Guatemala, her claims for withholding of
    removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture also failed. See
    Kratchmarov v. Heston, 
    172 F.3d 551
    , 555 (8th Cir. 1999) (withholding-of-removal
    standard is more onerous than asylum standard, and requires showing clear
    probability of persecution); 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2) (withholding of removal under
    Convention Against Torture requires applicant to show it is more likely than not he
    or she would be tortured upon removal to proposed country).
    On appeal, Mejia-Gutierrez raises two new grounds to support her claims of
    past persecution and fear of future persecution: (1) membership in a family persecuted
    by the guerillas, and (2) her status as an indigenous Indian woman. We lack
    jurisdiction to review issues first raised on appeal. See Afolayan v. INS, 
    219 F.3d 784
    , 788 (8th Cir. 2000).
    Accordingly, we deny the petition.
    ______________________________
    -2-