1

Alberto Gonzales has been appointed to serve as Attorney General of the

United States, and is substituted as appellee pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate

Procedure 43(c).

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 04-3309

___________

Dento Shuaibu, *

*

 Petitioner, *

* Petition for Review of an

v. * Order of the Board of

* Immigration Appeals.

Alberto Gonzales,1

 Attorney General *

of the United States, *

*

Respondent. *

*

___________

Submitted: September 21, 2005

Filed: October 18, 2005

___________

Before MURPHY, HEANEY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

HEANEY, Circuit Judge.

Dento Shuaibu seeks review of a final order of removal issued by the Board of

Immigration Appeals on August 27, 2004. The Board’s order affirmed without

opinion the immigration judge’s (IJ) decision, denying petitioner’s request for asylum
2

On March 1, 2003, services formerly provided by the Immigration and

Naturalization Service transitioned into the Department of Homeland Security as U.S.

Citizenship and Immigration Services.

3

An immigration officer made a preliminary determination that petitioner had

a credible fear of persecution in Liberia, and he was paroled into the United States.

Later, petitioner was granted a deferred enforcement departure as a Liberian.

4

According to the record, Shuaibu is not in custody.

-2-

and withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.

We deny the petition.

Background

Shuaibu attempted to enter the United States using a false British passport in

the name of Paul Darlington on April 9, 2001. He was stopped by Immigration and

Naturalization Service (INS) officers at the Miami International Airport.2

 The INS

placed petitioner in removal proceedings on April 17, 2001. Petitioner conceded that

he was subject to removal, and prompted by a credible fear determination by the INS,3

he filed an application for asylum and withholding of removal, as well as relief under

the Convention Against Torture. The INS referred petitioner’s asylum application to

the immigration court with the filing of a notice to appear. Shuaibu’s asylum

application focused on past persecution because he claimed that his father, a Liberian

military officer, and his sister, had been killed by government forces based upon their

imputed political opinion. Shuaibu also claimed a well-founded fear of future

persecution upon his return to Liberia on the basis of his and his family’s political

opinions, and their opposition to the Doe regime. On May 9, 2003, the IJ denied

petitioner’s application for asylum and related relief, and ordered him removed

without specifying to which country Shuaibu should return. Shuaibu's principal

argument is that he should not be returned to Liberia.4
5

The IJ stated:

In summary, the Court doesn't find this respondent to be a very

credible witness. He has . . . done nothing to provide any corroboration

for his claim. . . . No satisfactory explanation has been given by the

respondent as to why he would have a counterfeit Liberian birth

certificate.

This is a case without any objective corroboration, so the

respondent's credibility is at the core of the case. . . .

Simply put, for this Court to find that this respondent would have

either a well-founded fear of persecution in Liberia, or face a probability

of persecution or torture in that country, would be to create a claim out

of whole cloth. The evidence that the respondent has presented is so

minimal and so sketchy and so ill-supported that no claim can be

sustained on this under any form of relief.

Appellant’s App. at 25-26.

-3-

Discussion

We review denials of asylum under the substantial evidence standard. Zheng

v. Gonzales, 415 F.3d 955, 959 (8th Cir. 2005). After a careful review of the record

and the briefs submitted by the parties, we agree that the substantial evidence on the

record as a whole does not support Shuaibu's claim that he suffered past persecution

on the basis of his political opinions, or that if he is returned to Liberia, he has a wellfounded fear of future persecution because of his family's opposition to the Doe

regime. The IJ found that Shuaibu's testimony was not credible,5

 and we cannot say

that finding is unsupported by the record.

Of course, a finding that Shuaibu is not currently eligible for asylum and

related relief does not end the matter. We pause briefly to address the issue of
6

There is evidence in the record that Shuaibu has married a United States

citizen. We express no opinion as to whether this change in circumstances alters

Shuaibu’s status in the United States.

-4-

Shuaibu’s removal.6

 We are aware of the fact that the IJ does not identify the nation

to which Shuaibu should be removed. As an arriving alien, Shuaibu’s removal is

governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(1). As relevant to this case, the Attorney General

must first attempt to remove the alien to the country in which he boarded the airplane

that brought him to the United States. § 1231(b)(1)(A). Shuaibu arrived in the

United States on a flight that originated in Lagos, Nigeria on April 8, 2001. If

Nigeria will not accept Shuaibu, the Attorney General must then attempt to remove

Shuaibu to: 1) a country where he is a citizen, subject, or national; 2) the country in

which he was born; or 3) any country in which he maintains a residence. §

1231(b)(1)(C)(i-iii). If there remains no suitable destination, the Attorney General

may send the alien to a country whose government will accept Shuaibu. §

1231(b)(1)(C)(iv).

Although Shuaibu claimed he was a Liberian citizen, the IJ found this assertion

incredible. Indeed, the IJ concluded that Shuaibu had only "minimal connections to

Liberia." (Appellant’s App. at 23.) Thus, he cannot be removed to that country. See

Palavra v. INS, 287 F.3d 690, 694 (8th Cir. 2002) (holding that BIA failed to perform

its fact-finding function in determining that aliens were citizens and nationals of

Croatia and ordering them removed to Croatia, when aliens claimed to be Bosnian

citizens). Shuaibu admitted that he was born in Ghana and held citizenship from that

country, which appears to make Ghana a suitable destination if that country accepts

him. That matter is left to the Attorney General’s discretion, subject to our

recognition that the IJ’s own findings preclude the Agency from returning Shuaibu

to Liberia.

______________________________