Maurice Waweru v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., No. 11-3608 (8th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Petition for Review - Immigration. The court lacks jurisdiction to review determinations regarding the timeliness of petitioner's asylum application; court would not consider arguments and evidence not presented to the Board of Immigration Appeals; substantial evidence supports the denials of withholding of removal and CAT relief; no due process violation has been shown.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 11-3608 ___________________________ Maurice Kariuki Gita Waweru lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent ____________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: May 9, 2012 Filed: October 5, 2012 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BYE, COLLOTON, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Kenyan citizen Maurice Kariuki Gita Waweru petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed an immigration judge s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). This court lacks jurisdiction to review determinations regarding the untimeliness of Waweru s asylum application. See 8 U.S.C. ยง 1158(a)(3); Gumaneh v. Mukasey, 535 F.3d 785, 788 (8th Cir. 2008). As to Waweru s remaining contentions, we decline to consider arguments and evidence that were not presented to the BIA. See Doe v. Holder, 651 F.3d 824, 830 (8th Cir. 2011); Lukowski v. INS, 279 F.3d 644, 646 (8th Cir. 2002) ( judicial review is limited to administrative record ). We conclude that substantial evidence supports the denials of withholding of removal and CAT relief, and that Waweru s due process rights were not violated. For these reasons, we dismiss the petition with respect to the asylum claim and deny it in all other respects. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ -2-
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.
