Santiago Alonso-Guico v. Eric H. Holder, Jr., No. 14-1079 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Petition for Review - Immigration. Omaha Immigration Court. The decision to deny withholding of removal was supported by substantial evidence, and the petition for review is denied.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 14-1079 ___________________________ Santiago Alonso-Guico 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Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals ____________ Submitted: August 22, 2014 Filed: August 29, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before BYE, SMITH, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Guatemalan citizen Santiago Alonso-Guico petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, which upheld an immigration judge s denial of withholding of removal.1 We conclude that the denial of withholding of removal was supported by substantial evidence. See Alavez-Hernandez v. Holder, 714 F.3d 1063, 1066 (8th Cir. 2013) (to qualify for withholding of removal, applicant must show clear probability that his life or freedom would be threatened in proposed country of removal on account of protected ground); Ming Ming Wijono v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 868, 873 (8th Cir. 2006) (when family members remain in native country unharmed and applicant himself had not been targeted for abuse, reasonableness of fear of persecution for purposes of withholding of removal is diminished). The petition for review is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________ 1 Alonso was also denied asylum (as his claim was untimely) and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), but he has waived those claims. See ChayVelasquez v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004) (petitioner waives claim that is not meaningfully argued in opening brief). -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.
