Tomas Tarce v. Michael B. Mukasey, No. 08-1433 (8th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Petition for Review - Immigration. Decision of the Immigration Judge and the BIA that petitioner failed to establish either past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution was supported by substantial evidence, and the denial of asylum is affirmed.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 08-1433 ___________ Tomas Xorxe Tarce, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review v. * of an Order of the * Board of Immigration Appeals. 1 Mark Filip, Acting Attorney General * of the United States, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Respondent. * ___________ Submitted: January 30, 2009 Filed: February 4, 2009 ___________ Before RILEY, SMITH, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM. Guatemalan citizen Tomas Tarce petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming an Immigration Judge s (IJ s) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). 1 Mark Filip has been appointed to serve as Acting Attorney General, and is substituted as respondent pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). After careful review of the record, we conclude the decision of the IJ and the BIA--that Tarce failed to establish either past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground--is supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. See Eta-Ndu v. Gonzales, 411 F.3d 977, 982-83 (8th Cir. 2005) (standard of review); see also Quomsieh v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 602, 605 (8th Cir. 2007) (when BIA adopts IJ s decision and adds its own reasoning, this court reviews both decisions together). Because Tarce alleged the same factual basis for all his claims, the conclusions that support the denial of his asylum claim also support the denial of his withholding-of-removal and CAT claims. See Samedov v. Gonzales, 422 F.3d 704, 708-09 (8th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, we deny the petition. ______________________________ -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.
