Filed: Mar. 10, 2010
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 09-1446 _ Alhaji Cham, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of v. * an Order of the Board * of Immigration Appeals. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General * of the United States, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Respondent. * _ Submitted: March 5, 2010 Filed: March 10, 2010 _ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Alhaji Cham, a citizen of Gambia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), wh
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 09-1446 _ Alhaji Cham, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of v. * an Order of the Board * of Immigration Appeals. Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General * of the United States, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Respondent. * _ Submitted: March 5, 2010 Filed: March 10, 2010 _ Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Alhaji Cham, a citizen of Gambia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), whi..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 09-1446
___________
Alhaji Cham, *
*
Petitioner, *
* Petition for Review of
v. * an Order of the Board
* of Immigration Appeals.
Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General *
of the United States, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Respondent. *
___________
Submitted: March 5, 2010
Filed: March 10, 2010
___________
Before MELLOY, BOWMAN, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Alhaji Cham, a citizen of Gambia, petitions for review of an order of the Board
of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed an immigration judge’s denial of
asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture
(CAT). We conclude substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that
Cham did not meet his burden of proof for asylum. See Khrystotodorov v. Mukasey,
551 F.3d 775, 781 (8th Cir. 2008) (standard of review); Ming Ming Wijono v.
Gonzales,
439 F.3d 868, 872 (8th Cir. 2006) (there must be some nexus between
persecution and protected ground). Further, because Cham failed to meet the burden
of proof on his asylum claim, his claim for withholding of removal necessarily fails
as well, see Gitimu v. Holder,
581 F.3d 769, 774 (8th Cir. 2009), and we see no basis
in the record for CAT relief, see Miah v. Mukasey,
519 F.3d 784, 786-88 (8th Cir.
2008).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.
______________________________
-2-