Ibraahim Ibro v. Jefferson Sessions, III , 698 F. App'x 782 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •      Case: 16-60623      Document: 00514191118         Page: 1    Date Filed: 10/11/2017
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    No. 16-60623                                  FILED
    Summary Calendar                          October 11, 2017
    Lyle W. Cayce
    Clerk
    IBRAAHIM MUHAMMAD IBRO,
    Petitioner
    v.
    JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
    Respondent
    Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    BIA No. A208 379 463
    Before KING, ELROD, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM: *
    Ibraahim Muhammad Ibro, a native and citizen of Ethiopia who entered
    the United States without admission or parole, petitions for review of the order
    of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing his appeal of the denial
    of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the
    Convention Against Torture (CAT).                With respect to his asylum and
    withholding-of-removal claims, Ibro challenges the immigration judge’s
    * Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
    be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
    CIR. R. 47.5.4.
    Case: 16-60623     Document: 00514191118     Page: 2   Date Filed: 10/11/2017
    No. 16-60623
    finding that his testimony was not credible, but he fails to show that it is plain
    from the totality of the circumstances that “no reasonable fact-finder could
    make such an adverse credibility ruling.” Wang v. Holder, 
    569 F.3d 531
    , 538
    (5th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The BIA found
    it unnecessary to review the merits of his claims apart from the adverse
    credibility finding, which was fatal to the claims. Likewise, we conclude that
    the denial of relief turned on the assessment of Ibro’s credibility. See Chun v.
    INS, 
    40 F.3d 76
    , 78-79 (5th Cir. 1994).
    In addition, Ibro challenges the adverse credibility determination in the
    context of his CAT claim. Again, he has not shown that “any reasonable
    adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary.”            8 U.S.C.
    § 1252(b)(4)(B); see Zhang v. Gonzales, 
    432 F.3d 339
    , 344-45 (5th Cir. 2005).
    PETITION DENIED.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-60623

Citation Numbers: 698 F. App'x 782

Filed Date: 10/11/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023