Alzawed v. Barr, No. 19-2425 (8th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
The Eighth Circuit denied a petition for review of the BIA's order dismissing petitioner's appeal from an IJ's decision denying deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). As a preliminary matter, the court held that it need not determine whether the BIA applied an incorrect legal standard of review, because petitioner did not raise the aggregate risk argument before the BIA.
The court held that the BIA correctly found that res judicata did not bar consideration of past torture petitioner suffered in the 1980s and any error by the IJ in concluding otherwise was harmless both because the IJ nevertheless considered that evidence and because the BIA also considered the evidence and applied the correct legal standard. The court also held that substantial evidence in the record supports the BIA's conclusion that petitioner's argument that he would likely be tortured upon return to Iraq was based on a chain of assumptions and speculation.
Court Description: [Williams, Author, with Colloton and Benton, Circuit Judges] Petition for Review - Immigration. Arguments not raised before the BIA would not be considered in this petition for review; any error the IJ made in determining res judicata applied was harmless in light of the IJ's full consideration of petitioner's new evidence and because the BIA also considered the evidence and applied the correct legal standard; substantial evidence supported the BIA's conclusion that petitioner's argument that he would likely be tortured if he returned to Iraq was based on a chain of assumptions and speculation, and the BIA did not err in denying petitioner's request for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture.
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.