Case Name: Theodros BEFEKADU, Petitioner, v. U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2001-05-09
Citations: 10 F. App'x 97
Docket Number: No. 00-2483
Parties: Theodros BEFEKADU, Petitioner, v. U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
Judges: Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 10
Pages: 97–97

Head Matter:
Theodros BEFEKADU, Petitioner, v. U.S. IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
No. 00-2483.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted April 17, 2001.
Decided May 9, 2001.
David Goren, Law Office of David Goren, Silver Spring, MD, for petitioner. Stuart E. Schiffer, Acting Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Brenda E. Ellison, Senior Litigation, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.
Before WIDENER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Theodros Befekadu, a native and citizen of Ethiopia, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) denying his application for asylum and withholding of deportation. Befekadu contends he qualified for relief because of past persecution in the form of a six-month detention by Ethiopia's transitional government following the overthrow of Mengistu's brutal Marxist regime. While we do not condone Befekadu's detention, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board's conclusion that it does not qualify as persecution within the meaning of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4) (1994); 8 U.S.C.A. § 1101(a)(42)(A) (West 1999); Fatin v. INS, 12 F.3d 1233, 1240, 1243 (3d Cir. 1993); M.A. v. INS, 899 F.2d 304, 307 (4th Cir.1990) (en banc).
We accordingly affirm the Board's order. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
We note that 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4) was repealed by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA) effective April 1, 1997. Because this case was in transition at the time the IIRIRA was passed, 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a)(4) is still applicable here under the terms of the transitional rules contained in § 309(c) of the IIRIRA.