Triana v. Ashcroft ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1040
JAMES FRANK TRIANA,
Petitioner,
versus
JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals. (A79-092-485)
Submitted: July 26, 2004 Decided: August 18, 2004
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Roberto Matus, LAW OFFICES OF ROBERTO MATUS, PA, Miami, Florida,
for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General,
Linda S. Wendtland, Assistant Director, Shelley R. Goad, Office of
Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James Frank Triana, a native and citizen of Colombia,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals affirming, without opinion, the immigration judge’s denial
of asylum and withholding of removal, in accordance with 8 C.F.R.
§ 1003.1(e)(4) (2004). For the reasons discussed below, we deny
the petition for review.
Triana asserts that his testimony was credible and
corroborated, and was therefore sufficient to establish his
eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination
denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the
evidence 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 (1992). We have
reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Triana fails to
show that the evidence compels a contrary result.
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
- 2 -