Cheru v. Ashcroft

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-1381
ASRAT AWOKE CHERU,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, United States Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A75-334-557)
Submitted: December 3, 2004 Decided: January 25, 2005
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Asrat Awoke Cheru, Petitioner Pro Se. Raymond Smith, IMMIGRATION
& NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Arlington, Virginia; Emily Anne Radford,
Terri Leon-Benner, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington,
D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Asrat Awoke Cheru, a native and citizen of Ethiopia,
petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order
affirming without opinion the immigration judge’s decision denying
asylum and withholding from removal. For the reasons discussed
below, we deny the petition for review.
The decision to grant or deny asylum relief is conclusive
“unless manifestly contrary to the law and an abuse of discretion.”
8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(D) (2000). We have reviewed the immigration
judge’s decision and the administrative record and find the record
supports the conclusion that Cheru failed to establish past
persecution or a well founded fear of persecution. See 8 C.F.R.
§ 1208.13(a) (2004) (stating that the burden of proof is on the
alien to establish his eligibility for asylum); INS v.
Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483 (1992). Because the decision in
this case is not manifestly contrary to law, we cannot grant the
relief Cheru seeks.*
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
*
Cheru does not challenge the denial of his application for
withholding from removal.
- 2 -