Velazquez Adame v. Garland, No. 20-61181 (5th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 20-61181 Document: 00516358972 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/15/2022 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 15, 2022 No. 20-61181 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Hortencia Velazquez Adame; Everardo Perez Velazquez; Luis Aldeir Perez Velazquez; Arileny Perez Velazquez, Petitioners, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A208 925 454 BIA No. A208 925 455 BIA No. A208 925 456 BIA No. A208 925 457 Before Jones, Stewart, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-61181 Document: 00516358972 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/15/2022 No. 20-61181 Hortencia Velazquez Adame, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from the denial of her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). 1 We review the BIA’s decision and consider the immigration judge’s decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA. Singh v. Sessions, 880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018). Factual findings are reviewed for substantial evidence and legal determinations are reviewed de novo. Lopez-Gomez v. Ashcroft, 263 F.3d 442, 444 (5th Cir. 2001). Because Velazquez Adame failed to exhaust her claims concerning the validity of her notice to appear and her membership in a particular social group (PSG) consisting of those who have cooperated with law enforcement officials we lack jurisdiction to consider them. See Flores-Abarca v. Barr, 937 F.3d 473, 477-78 (5th Cir. 2019); Roy v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 132, 137 (5th Cir. 2004). She identifies no error in the BIA’s determination that she was ineligible for asylum or withholding of relief because she failed to show membership in a cognizable PSG. See Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012). Finally, because her argument concerning her CAT claim is speculative, she has not shown that substantial evidence compels a conclusion contrary to that of the BIA on this issue. See Morales v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 812, 818 (5th Cir. 2017); Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). The petition for review is DENIED in part and DISMISSED in part. 1 Hortencia Velazquez Adame is the lead applicant, and the other three derivative applicants are her children. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
