UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

MARIA CARMEN LECCA; ERNESTO

LECCA; DAPHNE GISELA LECCA;

CARMEN FRANCESCA LECCA,

Petitioners,

No. 97-1927

v.

U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION

SERVICE,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order

of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

(A72-371-964, A72-371-965, A72-371-966, A72-371-967)

Submitted: January 20, 1998

Decided: February 11, 1998

Before HALL and ERVIN, Circuit Judges, and

PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

John William O'Leary, JOHN O'LEARY & ASSOCIATES, Washington, D.C., for Petitioners. Frank W. Hunger, Assistant Attorney

General, Michael P. Lindemann, Assistant Director, Douglas E. Ginsburg, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Maria Carmen Lecca seeks review of the decision of the Board of

Immigration Appeals denying relief on her application for asylum and

withholding of deportation.1

Lecca and her children came to the United States in 1991 from

Peru with tourist visas, and stayed beyond the authorized period. The

Immigration and Naturalization Service commenced deportation proceedings against Lecca and her children. Lecca conceded deportability and sought asylum and withholding of deportation. Lecca

claimed that her family was the victim of an extortion scheme by

guerrillas in Peru, motivated by her family's political opposition to

the guerrillas. At the deportation hearing, the immigration judge

found Lecca deportable and denied her application for asylum and

withholding of deportation, but granted her alternative request for voluntary departure. On appeal, the Board found that Lecca failed to

demonstrate that she was persecuted or had a well-founded fear of

future persecution in Peru on account of her or her family's political

opinion, and thus dismissed her appeal.

Nothing in the record shows that the Leccas expressed a political

opinion regarding the guerrillas, or that the extortion scheme precipitating their departure from Peru was motivated by the Leccas' real or

perceived political opinion. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478,

481-83 (1992); Chen Zhou Chai v. Carroll, 48 F.3d 1331, 1342-43

(4th Cir. 1995). Thus, our review of the record discloses that the

Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the

Board. Lecca v. INS, Nos. A72-371-964; A72-371-965; A72-371-966;

A72-371-967 (B.I.A. June 17, 1997). We dispense with oral argument

_________________________________________________________________

1 Lecca's children did not file their own applications.

 2
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED

 3