Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03848/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03848-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alberto Gonzales
Respondent
Gocha Kutchaidze
Petitioner

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-3848

___________

Gocha Kutchaidze, *

*

Petitioner, *

* Petition for Review of a Final

v. * Decision of the Board

* of Immigration Appeals.

Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General *

of the United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Respondent. *

__________

Submitted: February 16, 2007

Filed: February 23, 2007

___________

Before RILEY, MELLOY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. 

___________

PER CURIAM.

Gocha Kutchaidze (Kutchaidze), a native and citizen of the Republic of

Georgia, petitions this court for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration

Appeals (BIA), affirming without opinion the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his

requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention

Against Torture (CAT). We deny the petition.

At his hearing before the IJ, Kutchaidze testified he was born in the Republic

of Georgia and he and his parents, who still reside in the Republic of Georgia, are

Jehovah’s Witnesses. Kutchaidze stated he was baptized as a Jehovah’s Witness as

Appellate Case: 05-3848 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/23/2007 Entry ID: 3281341
-2-

a young boy, but he could not remember the exact date. Kutchaidze testified he and

his parents have, on several occasions, suffered harm because of their religion.

Kutchaidze specifically stated that, while he was attending a religious meeting

with his parents, a group of civilians attacked him in 1991. During that attack, a

civilian stabbed him in the back with a knife and, as a result, he was hospitalized for

three weeks. Kutchaidze testified another incident occurred in 2000, when he and

others planned to participate in a gathering of Jehovah’s Witnesses. Kutchaidze

explained civilians confronted him and the other Jehovah’s Witnesses while on a bus

en route to the gathering. Kutchaidze testified these civilians threw stones at them

and, as a result, he and the rest of the congregation were forced to retreat without

attending the gathering. Kutchaidze reported a similar incident took place in 2001,

when members of the congregation were again on a bus en route to a gathering.

Kutchaidze stated he and other congregation members were beaten with sticks. The

civilian attackers told Kutchaidze they would burn and kill him. Kutchaidze further

testified that, on November 25, 2002, while walking home, a group of civilians told

him to leave the Republic of Georgia or they would cut off his head. According to

Kutchaidze, this group of civilians beat him until he lost consciousness. Kutchaidze

said he decided to come to the United States after this incident.

On December 30, 2002, Kutchaidze entered the United States in Chicago,

Illinois, as a non-immigrant visitor with authorization to remain in the country until

March 29, 2003. The INS commenced removal proceedings against Kutchaidze on

October 22, 2003. Kutchaidze conceded removability, and applied for asylum,

withholding of removal, and protection under the CAT, stating he was a Jehovah’s

Witness and desired to practice his religion freely without harm. After a hearing, the

IJ issued an oral decision finding Kutchaidze removable and denying all his claims.

Kutchaidze appealed to the BIA. The BIA dismissed his appeal and affirmed the IJ’s

decision without opinion. Kutchaidze filed a motion to stay his removal, which this

court granted. Kutchaidze also petitioned for review of the BIA’s decision, arguing

Appellate Case: 05-3848 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/23/2007 Entry ID: 3281341
-3-

the IJ erred by making adverse credibility determinations and by rejecting his requests

for relief.

When the BIA affirms an IJ’s decision without opinion, this court reviews the

IJ’s decision as though the decision were issued by the BIA. Palomino v. Ashcroft,

354 F.3d 942, 943 (8th Cir. 2004). The IJ’s decision must be reversed if, after

considering the record as a whole, the court determines the IJ’s factual findings were

not supported by “reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence.” Perinpanathan v.

INS, 310 F.3d 594, 597-98 (8th Cir. 2002). To be eligible for asylum, an applicant

must show he has a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of his race,

religion, nationality, membership in a political social group, or political opinion if he

is returned to his native country. Id. (citing 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(1) and

1101(a)(42)(A)).

Kutchaidze argues the IJ, in denying Kutchaidze asylum, erred in making

adverse credibility findings with respect to Kutchaidze’s claim that he is a Jehovah’s

Witness. Here, the IJ noted, inter alia, Kutchaidze (1) had no records indicating he

was baptized as a Jehovah’s Witness; (2) had no letters from his family in the

Republic of Georgia to confirm he is a Jehovah’s Witness; (3) introduced no records

from the congregation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses in the Republic of Georgia

confirming he is a Jehovah’s Witness; (4) had not attended any meetings of the

Jehovah’s Witnesses while residing in the United States; and (5) had not proselytized

in the United States.

However, even if we assume arguendo, Kutchaidze is a Jehovah’s Witness, the

incidents alleged by Kutchaidze fail to establish a well-founded fear of future

persecution. To establish a well-founded fear of future persecution, an alien must

show through credible, direct, and specific evidence that his fear is both subjectively

genuine and objectively reasonable. Surya v. Gonzalez, 454 F.3d 874, 877 (8th Cir.

2006). The IJ noted Kutchaidze’s parents (who provide care for Kuchaidze’s infant

Appellate Case: 05-3848 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/23/2007 Entry ID: 3281341
-4-

son) currently live in the Republic of Georgia as Jehovah’s Witnesses and there is no

evidence they have suffered any harm since the alleged 1991 incident. See

Krasnopivtsev v. Ashcroft, 382 F.3d 832, 839 (8th Cir. 2004) (“The reasonableness

of a fear of persecution is diminished when family members remain in the native

country unharmed. ”). In fact, as the IJ found, Kutchaidze came to the United States

as a visitor in 1999 with his parents, and they never sought asylum.

Moreover, the attacks described by Kutchaidze refer to actions by private

citizens, not governmental officials, which do not rise to the level of persecution

required for asylum eligibility. Id. (“Harassment by private citizens does not rise to

the level of persecution.” (citation omitted)). Kutchaidze’s claims do not establish

either past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on the basis of

religious beliefs. Thus, the denial of asylum must be affirmed.

Likewise, the denial of Kutchaidze’s requests for withholding of removal and

for protection under the CAT must be affirmed. “To be eligible for withholding of

removal, 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3), the standard is more demanding [than the standard

for asylum].” Id. at 840. “The alien must show a ‘clear probability’ that he or she will

face persecution in the country to which he or she will be deported.” Id. (citation

omitted). Because Kutchaidze failed to demonstrate he is eligible for asylum,

Kutchaidze’s claim for withholding of removal, under a higher burden of proof, also

must fail. Id.

“To qualify for relief under [the CAT], the applicant must prove that it is more

likely than not that he would be tortured if returned to the proposed country of

removal, considering the testimony of the applicant as to past torture, the possibility

of relocation within the country, mass violations of human rights, or other relevant

information regarding conditions within the country.” Id. (citing 8 C.F.R.

§ 208.16(c)). “Torture is defined as an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether

physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted, and it is an extreme form of cruel and

Appellate Case: 05-3848 Page: 4 Date Filed: 02/23/2007 Entry ID: 3281341
-5-

inhuman treatment; it does not include lesser forms of cruel, inhuman, or degrading

treatment.” Id. (citing 8 C.F.R. § 208.18(a)(1), (2)). We agree with the BIA and the

IJ that Kutchaidze failed to show he would more likely than not be subjected to torture

if returned to the Republic of Georgia. Thus, Kutchaidze’s claim under the CAT must

fail.

Kutchaidze also claims the IJ erred by not considering several documents

relating to his hospitalization in the Republic of Georgia in 1991. However, these

documents were received by the IJ six days before the removal hearing, which was in

violation of the IJ’s order requiring exhibits be submitted two months before the

hearing. After the government objected to the admission of these documents, the IJ,

noting these documents existed well before the deadline invoked by the IJ’s order,

ruled the documents were not timely and, thus, were inadmissible. “[T]he sole test for

admission of evidence is whether it is relevant and whether its admission is

fundamentally fair.” Id. at 837. Here, the IJ properly excluded those documents that

were submitted in violation of the IJ’s order. It would be unfair to afford the

government only a few days before the hearing to investigate these documents. The

government was not required to seek a continuance to respond to the new evidence,

thereby suffering a significant delay in the government’s removal process.

However, even if these documents were admitted, the outcome of this case

would not be altered. As previously stated, the incidents described by Kutchaidze

cannot support a claim for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the

CAT.

For these reasons, we deny the petition.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-3848 Page: 5 Date Filed: 02/23/2007 Entry ID: 3281341