Case Name: Gesper PAUL, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2009-12-29
Citations: 358 F. App'x 444
Docket Number: No. 09-1061
Parties: Gesper PAUL, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 358
Pages: 444–445

Head Matter:
Gesper PAUL, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 09-1061.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Nov. 18, 2009.
Decided: Dec. 29, 2009.
Randall L. Johnson, Johnson & Associates, P.C., Arlington, Virginia, for Petitioner. Tony West, Assistant Attorney General, William C. Peachey, Assistant Director, Rebecca Hoffberg, United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Petition denied by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gesper Paul, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming the Immigration Judge's denial of his applications for relief from removal.
Paul first challenges the determination that he failed to establish eligibility for asylum. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien "must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution." INS v. Elias-Zacavias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Paul fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result.
Having failed to qualify for asylum, Paul cannot meet the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. Chen v. INS, 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir.1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 430, 107 S.Ct. 1207, 94 L.Ed.2d 434 (1987). Finally, we uphold the finding below that Paul failed to demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured if removed to Haiti. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2009).
We therefore deny the petition for review. 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.
PETITION DENIED.