John Asirifi v. Jefferson B. Sessions, III ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 17-1985
    ___________________________
    John Asirifi
    lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner
    v.
    Jefferson B. Sessions, III, Attorney General of the United States
    lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent
    ____________
    Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    ____________
    Submitted: February 28, 2018
    Filed: March 7, 2018
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before LOKEN, KELLY, and ERICKSON, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    John Asirifi, a citizen of Ghana, petitions for review of an order of the Board
    of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the decision of an immigration
    judge (IJ) denying him asylum and withholding of removal.1
    Upon de novo review, this court concludes that Asirifi has not shown that the
    IJ committed a fundamental procedural error, and thus his due process claim fails.
    See Alva-Arellano v. Lynch, 
    811 F.3d 1064
    , 1066 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of
    review; to establish due process violation, alien must demonstrate both fundamental
    procedural error and prejudice). The record reveals that the IJ complied with the
    federal law and regulations governing the conduct of removal proceedings, and that
    Asirifi received a full and fair opportunity to present evidence, offer arguments, and
    develop the record. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(4); 8 C.F.R. §§ 1240.10(a), .11(c)(1);
    Tun v. Gonzales, 
    485 F.3d 1014
    , 1025 (8th Cir. 2007) (alien seeking immigration
    relief is entitled to fundamentally fair removal hearing under Fifth Amendment’s Due
    Process Clause); Al Khouri v. Ashcroft, 
    362 F.3d 461
    , 464–65 (8th Cir. 2004) (IJ
    must fully develop the record but is not required to act as alien’s advocate or lawyer).
    The petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    1
    We lack jurisdiction to consider Asirifi’s claim that this court should grant him
    relief under the Convention Against Torture, as he failed to raise it during his agency
    proceedings. See Agha v. Holder, 
    743 F.3d 609
    , 616–17 (8th Cir. 2014).
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 17-1985

Judges: Loken, Kelly, Erickson

Filed Date: 3/7/2018

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024