Awejia v. Gonzales

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-1730
CINDY ITUAKUM AWEJIA,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A78-156-026)
Submitted: January 20, 2006 Decided: February 23, 2006
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Cindy Ituakum Awejia, Petitioner Pro Se. M. Jocelyn Lopez Wright,
Song E. Park, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Cindy Ituakum Awejia, a native and citizen of Cameroon,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals dismissing her appeal from the immigration judge’s denial
of her requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection
under the Convention Against Torture.
We first address the determination that Awejia failed to
establish her eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a
determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show
that the evidence [s]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 Awejia
fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result.
Accordingly, we cannot grant the relief that she seeks.
Additionally, we uphold the denial of Awejia’s request
for withholding of removal. “Because the burden of proof for
withholding of removal is higher than for asylum--even though the
facts that must be proved are the same--an applicant who is
ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for withholding of
removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).” Camara v. Ashcroft, 378
F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). Because Awejia fails to show that
she is eligible for asylum, she cannot meet the higher standard for
withholding of removal.
- 2 -
We also find that substantial evidence supports the
finding that Awejia fails to meet the standard for relief under the
Convention Against Torture. To obtain such relief, 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) (2005). We find that Awejia failed to
make the requisite showing before the immigration court.
Finally, we have reviewed the remaining arguments
advanced by Awejia in her informal brief and find them to be
without merit. Accordingly, although we grant Awejia’s motion for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis, 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
- 3 -