Cesar Chali-Alvarez v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.
This text of 356 F. App'x 888 (Cesar Chali-Alvarez v. Eric H. Holder, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Cesar Chali-AIvarez and Timotea Rodriguez-Smith, natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which affirmed an immigration judge’s denial of asylum and cancellation of removal. 2 Because substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that petitioners were not subjected to past persecution and do not have a well-founded fear of future persecution in Guatemala, we deny review of petitioners’ asylum claims. See Khrystoto-dorov v. Mukasey, 551 F.3d 775, 781 (8th Cir.2008) (standard of review); Malonga v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 546, 552 (8th Cir.2008) (defining persecution); Melecio-Saquil v. Ashcroft, 337 F.3d 983, 986-87 (8th Cir.2003) (changed country conditions in Guatemala after 1996 peace accords). Because this court lacks jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Chali-AIvarez failed to prove his removal would cause an exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his children, under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l)(D), we also deny review of his claim for cancellation of removal. See Zacarias-Velasquez v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 429, 434 (8th Cir.2007) (standard of review).
Accordingly, the petition for review is denied.
. Petitioners do not challenge the denial of withholding of removal. See Averianova v. Mukasey, 509 F.3d 890, 892 n. 1 (8th Cir.2007) (aliens waived claim by failing to present argument on appeal).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
356 F. App'x 888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cesar-chali-alvarez-v-eric-h-holder-jr-ca8-2009.