Ahmed v. Gonzales
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Mohiuddin A.K.M. Ahmed petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (IJ) order denying asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and we deny the petition.1
[596]*596Ahmed is ineligible for asylum and withholding of removal for two reasons: (1) because he engaged in terrorist activity,2 and (2) because he assisted or otherwise participated in the persecution of others on account of their political opinion.3 Even his own account of his actions established that he assisted or otherwise participated in the persecution of persons on account of their political opinion.4
Ahmed failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his in absentia murder trial and conviction in Bangladesh was fundamentally unfair and thus deprived him of due process of law.5 Therefore, the IJ properly relied on the conviction.
Substantial evidence supported the IJ’s and BIA’s denial of protection under the CAT.6 Ahmed did not present evidence so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could find that he would not be tortured if returned to Bangladesh.7
PETITION DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
221 F. App'x 595 (Ahmed v. Gonzales) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.