Yawa Agbenu v. Eric Holder, Jr., No. 14-1088 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1088 YAWA MAWUSE BEATRICE AGBENU, Petitioner, v. ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: August 27, 2014 Decided: September 10, 2014 Before NIEMEYER, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ronald D. Richey, LAW OFFICE OF RONALD D. RICHEY, Rockville, Maryland, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney General, John S. Hogan, Senior Litigation Counsel, Laura M.L. Maroldy, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Yawa Mawuse Beatrice Agbenu, a native and citizen of Togo, petitions Immigration for Appeals review of ( Board ) an order dismissing of her the Board of from the appeal immigration judge s decision denying her requests for asylum, withholding Against of removal Torture and withholding ( CAT ). 1 We have under the thoroughly Convention reviewed the record, including Agbenu s testimony, her documentary exhibits, and her evidence supporting does not statements compel a and ruling conclude contrary that to the any record of the administrative findings of fact, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), decision. and that substantial evidence supports the Board s See Figeroa v. INS, 886 F.2d 76, 78 (4th Cir. 1989); INS v. Elias Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. 2 See In re: Agbenu (B.I.A. Jan. 3, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 1 This case has returned to the court after we granted the Attorney General s unopposed motion to remand to the Board. 2 Agbenu does not challenge the Board s finding that she waived review of the denial of relief under the CAT. Accordingly, review of that issue is waived. Ngarurih v. Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 182, 189 n.7 (4th Cir. 2004). 2 adequately presented in the materials before this 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.