NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 21-3001 ADEBODUN ADEBOMI IDOWU, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA On Petition for Review of a Final Order Of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA No.: A204-892-773) Immigration Judge: Audra Behne Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) on November 14, 2022 Before: AMBRO, KRAUSE, and BIBAS, Circuit Judges (Opinion Filed: December 1, 2022) OPINION* AMBRO, Circuit Judge. * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. Petitioner Abebodun Abebomi Idowu seeks review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his request for withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3) and for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). For the following reasons, we deny the petition for review. I. Idowu is a native and citizen of Nigeria. For a time, he was a conditional lawful permanent resident based on his marriage to a United States citizen. However, in 2017, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services found “overwhelming evidence” that his marriage was not bona fide and terminated his status. A.R. 233. A year later, Idowu was charged and convicted for money laundering and conspiracy to commit money laundering, for which he was sentenced to 16 months in prison. Following his conviction, the Department of Homeland Security ordered Idowu administratively removed from the United States under INA § 238(b). He then sought withholding of removal and CAT relief based on claimed fear of torture in Nigeria.1 Before an IJ, Idowu testified that his money laundering co-conspirators were Boko Haram members who had coerced him into criminal activity before he left Nigeria. He alleged that he would be subject to grave harm if forced to return to Nigeria and that the police and local authorities would acquiesce. On June 11, 2019, the IJ denied Idowu’s applications for relief. She held that Idowu’s money laundering conviction constituted a particularly serious crime, rendering 1 Idowu also initially sought asylum but abandoned that relief before the agency and on appeal. 2 him ineligible for withholding of removal and CAT relief. She also found Idowu’s testimony not credible based on multiple inconsistencies and omissions in his claims. The BIA dismissed the appeal. In doing so, it agreed with the IJ’s adverse credibility determination, ruling that Idowu had “not demonstrated that the individuals he claims will torture him, that is, his co-conspirators or individuals acting in league with them, are in fact members of or in any way affiliated with Boko Haram.” A.R. 6. Absent such a showing, the BIA agreed with the IJ that Idowu could not show eligibility for withholding of removal or CAT relief. The BIA also rejected his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, observing that he had failed to demonstrate “that his previous counsel’s performance was deficient.” A.R. 7. It added that “even if [Idowu] had shown that his previous counsel’s performance was deficient, he …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals