Busiku v. Gonzales

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 16, 2005
Docket04-2259
StatusUnpublished

This text of Busiku v. Gonzales (Busiku v. Gonzales) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Busiku v. Gonzales, (4th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-2259

EDWARD BUSIKU,

Petitioner,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A95-221-369)

Submitted: April 20, 2005 Decided: May 16, 2005

Before LUTTIG, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jason A. Dzubow, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, David V. Bernal, Assistant Director, Margaret K. Taylor, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

Edward Busiku, a native and citizen of the Democratic

Republic of the Congo, petitions for review of an order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from

the immigration judge’s denial of his requests for asylum,

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against

Torture. We have reviewed the record and the Board’s order and

find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision to

uphold the immigration judge’s denial of Busiku’s requests for

withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against

Torture. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review on the

reasoning of the Board. See In re: Busiku, No. A95-221-369 (B.I.A.

Sept. 10, 2004). 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

- 2 -

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Busiku v. Gonzales, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/busiku-v-gonzales-ca4-2005.