Hiwot Tekle v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 09-1526 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-1526 HIWOT WELDE MARIAM TEKLE, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: February 24, 2010 Decided: March 9, 2010 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Zewdu A. Derseh, Silver Spring, Maryland, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, Emily Anne Radford, Assistant Director, Patrick J. Glen, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Hiwot Ethiopia, Welde petitions Mariam for Tekle, review of a an native order and of citizen the Board of 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. Tekle failed to first establish challenges her the eligibility determination for asylum. that To she 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. 478, 483-84 (1992). INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Tekle fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. We therefore find that substantial evidence supports the denial of relief. Additionally, we uphold the denial of Tekle 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). 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). 2 Camara v. Ashcroft, Because Tekle failed to show that she is eligible for asylum, she cannot meet the higher standard for withholding of removal. Finally, we find that substantial evidence supports the finding that Tekle failed 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. Tekle failed 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2009). to make the requisite We find that showing before the review. We immigration court. Accordingly, dispense with oral we deny argument the petition because the for facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
