Gonzalez v. Gonzales

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
February 27, 2006
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-60065
Summary Calendar
FRANK HERBERT GONZALEZ,
Petitioner,
versus
ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
--------------------
Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
BIA No. A78 601 994
--------------------
Before SMITH, GARZA, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Frank Herbert Gonzalez petitions for review of an order by
the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which denied his
application for asylum, withholding of removal under the
Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), and relief under the
Convention Against Torture. Gonzalez argues that he has
demonstrated past persecution and a well-founded fear of future
persecution based on his real or imputed political opinion.

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 05-60065
-2-
Therefore, he contends that the BIA erred by determining that he
was ineligible for asylum.
This court will uphold the BIA’s finding that an alien is
not eligible for asylum if that finding is supported by
substantial evidence. Girma v. INS, 283 F.3d 664, 666 (5th Cir.
2002). Under this standard, the BIA’s determination will be
affirmed “unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion.”
Carbajal-Gonzalez v. INS, 78 F.3d 194, 197 (5th Cir. 1996).
The BIA determined that Gonzalez had not shown that threats
from members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia
(FARC), a Colombian guerilla group, were based on Gonzalez’s
actual or imputed political opinion. Although Gonzalez asserts
that FARC persecuted him due to his political opinion, he did not
testify that the FARC members who threatened him in 1979, 1998,
1999, or 2000 knew that he was a member of the Liberal Party.
Furthermore, he acknowledged that FARC threatened him in 2000
because he reported its plan to steal gas canisters and use them
as bombs. Gonzalez has not shown that the evidence compels a
conclusion contrary to that of the BIA. See Carbajal-Gonzalez,
78 F.3d at 197.
Gonzalez has not briefed the BIA’s denial of his requests
for withholding of removal or for relief under the CAT.
Therefore, he has waived these claims. See Rodriguez v. INS, 9
F.3d 408, 414 n.15 (5th Cir. 1993).
Accordingly, Gonzalez’s petition for review is DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --