Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01604/USCOURTS-ca8-05-01604-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alberto Gonzales
Respondent
Sarah Nkurunungi
Petitioner

Document Text:

1

The IJ’s decision, therefore, constitutes the final agency determination for

purposes of judicial review. See Kimumwe v. Gonzales, 431 F.3d 319, 322 (8th Cir.

2005).

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-1604

___________

Sarah Nkurunungi, *

*

Petitioner, *

* Petition for Review of

v. * an Order of the Board of

* Immigration Appeals.

Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General *

of the United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Respondent. *

___________

Submitted: September 6, 2006

Filed: September 11, 2006

___________

Before SMITH, MAGILL, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Sarah Nkurunungi, a citizen of Uganda, petitions for review of an order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which summarily affirmed an Immigration

Judge’s (IJ’s) denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the

Convention Against Torture (CAT).1

Appellate Case: 05-1604 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/11/2006 Entry ID: 2087718
-2-

After careful review of the record, we conclude the IJ’s asylum decision--based

on the finding that Nkurunungi failed to establish a well-founded fear of future

persecution--is supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. See

Eta-Ndu v. Gonzales, 411 F.3d 977, 982-83 (8th Cir. 2005) (standard of review).

Further, because Nkurunungi failed to meet the burden of proof on her asylum claim,

her claim for withholding of removal necessarily fails as well, see Turay v. Ashcroft,

405 F.3d 663, 667 (8th Cir. 2005) (withholding-of-removal standard is more rigorous

than asylum standard), and we see no basis in the record for CAT relief, see

Habtemicael v. Ashcroft, 370 F.3d 774, 780-82 (8th Cir. 2004) (discussing

considerations relevant to relief under CAT).

Accordingly, we deny the petition. We also deny Nkurunungi’s motion to

supplement the record. We previously granted Nkurunungi’s motion for stay of her

removal and voluntary-departure period; the remaining period in which she may

voluntarily depart the United States shall begin to run when our mandate in this case

is issued, see Falaja v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 889, 899-900 (8th Cir. 2005).

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-1604 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/11/2006 Entry ID: 2087718