Tesfaye v. Ashcroft
Tesfaye v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Tigist Hailu Tesfaye, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“Board”) order dismissing the appeal and finding she failed to meet her burden of proof with respect to her request for asylum, withholding from removal, or withholding under the Convention Against Torture.
On appeal, Tesfaye challenges the Board’s determination that she failed to establish her eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence [s]he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We have reviewed the record and conclude Tesfaye fails to show the evidence compels a contrary result.
Additionally, we uphold the Board’s denial of Tesfaye’s request for withholding of *529 removal. The standard for withholding of removal is more stringent than that for granting asylum. Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999). To qualify for withholding of removal, an applicant must demonstrate “a clear probability of persecution.” INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430, 107 S.Ct. 1207, 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987). Because Tesfaye fails to show she is eligible for asylum, she cannot meet the higher standard for withholding of removal.
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.