UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

SALVADOR HERNANDEZ,
Petitioner,

v.
                                                                       No. 97-1879
U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION
SERVICE,
Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order
of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
(A72-121-280)

Submitted: November 25, 1997

Decided: February 2, 1998

Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Donald L. Schlemmer, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Frank W.
Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, Christopher C. Fuller, Senior
Litigation Counsel, Alison Marie Igoe, Office of Immigration Litiga-
tion, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUS-
TICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner Salvador Hernandez, a citizen of El Salvador, seeks
review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision and order
affirming the immigration judge's decision finding Hernandez deport-
able, denying his application for asylum1 and withholding deportation,2
and granting voluntary departure. Hernandez, who entered the United
States without inspection in July 1991, claims that he was persecuted
while in El Salvador and that he has a well-founded fear of persecu-
tion if he returns to El Salvador. After review, we deny the petition.

To be eligible for refugee status and discretionary asylum, Her-
nandez must show a reasonable possibility of persecution, or that a
reasonable person in similar circumstances would fear persecution on
account of his political beliefs or one of the other enumerated provi-
sions of the statute. Hernandez testified at the hearing held by the
immigration judge that he feared for his life if he returned to El Salva-
dor because he belonged to a civil defense organization from 1990 to
1991. According to Hernandez, ex-guerillas might recognize him and
attempt to kill him in retribution for lost loved ones, even though Her-
nandez had a limited role in the war and did not participate in direct
combat with the guerillas. Hernandez also claimed that his brother
during a thirty-day visit to El Salvador was accosted by armed men
looking for him; however, Hernandez could not provide the identities
of the men, nor could he verify that the men were ex-guerillas.

The statute provides that administrative findings of fact are conclu-
sive unless a reasonable adjudicator is compelled to conclude
otherwise.3 Therefore, we will uphold the decision of the BIA unless
_________________________________________________________________
1 See 8 U.S.C.A. § 1158(a) (West 1970 & Supp. 1997).
2 See 8 U.S.C.A. § 1253(h) (West 1970 & Supp. 1997).
3 See 8 U.S.C.A. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (West 1970 & Supp. 1997).

                     2
the evidence compels the conclusion that the petitioner has a well-
founded fear of persecution because of his political opinion or one of
the other enumerated bases in the statute.4 In this case, the evidence
simply does not compel the conclusion that Hernandez will be sub-
jected to persecution or other harm upon his return to El Salvador.

The immigration judge found Hernandez unable to satisfy the stan-
dards for granting asylum or withholding deportation. While guerillas
detained Hernandez for a period of time in April 1990, Hernandez
failed to meet his burden that the guerillas' intent was to punish him
for his membership in the civil defense or his political opinions. Her-
nandez testified that the guerillas repeatedly asked him questions and
requested information during his detention, but Hernandez acknowl-
edged that he was released unharmed and that he did not leave El Sal-
vador for another fifteen months. Further, even if Hernandez's brother
was accosted by armed men allegedly looking for Hernandez, Her-
nandez failed to establish that the men were ex-guerillas or that they
sought him because of his membership in the civil defense. Unfortu-
nately, violent crime is a common by-product of civil unrest,5 and
nothing indicates that his brother's attackers were more than violent
criminals. While Hernandez's detention seven years ago may have
been terrifying, the record does not compel a finding that the immi-
gration judge erred in finding that Hernandez failed to establish a
well-founded fear of persecution on account of actual or imputed
political opinion or any of the other grounds for which asylum may
be granted: race, religion, nationality, or membership in a particular
social group.6

In conclusion, Hernandez failed to establish that ex-guerillas will
persecute him because of his former membership in the civil defense,
or that he faces any harm beyond the civil unrest in El Salvador itself.7
While conditions in El Salvador remain imperfect, Hernandez's par-
ents continue to live in El Salvador without incident, and a State
_________________________________________________________________
4 See I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias, 

, 481 (1992).
5 See Huaman-Cordelio v. Board of Immigration Appeals, 

, 1000 (4th Cir. 1992).

6 See M.A. v. I.N.S., 

, 312-14 (4th Cir. 1990) (in banc).
7 See 

; 

.

                    3
Department report on human rights concludes that similarly situated
individuals have little to fear upon returning to El Salvador.

Because substantial evidence supports the decision of the BIA,
Hernandez's petition for review is denied, and the decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals is affirmed. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pres-
ented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

                    4