Francisca Juarez-Juarez v. Merrick Garland, No. 23-1149 (4th Cir. 2023)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 23-1149 FRANCISCA YANELI JUAREZ-JUAREZ; V.M.L.J., Petitioners, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. Submitted: August 29, 2023 Decided: August 31, 2023 Before KING, AGEE, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: Juan Laguna, LAW OFFICE OF JUAN LAGUNA, Santa Ana, California, for Petitioners. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, John S. Hogan, Assistant Director, Lindsay Dunn, Civil Division, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Petitioners Francisca Yaneli Juarez-Juarez and her minor daughter, V.M.L.J., natives and citizens of Guatemala, petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing their appeal from the immigration judge’s oral decision denying Juarez-Juarez’s applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Upon review of the administrative record in conjunction with the arguments raised in this court, we are satisfied that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the administrative factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that substantial evidence supports the denial of relief, see INS v. EliasZacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992). Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. In re Juarez-Juarez (B.I.A. Jan. 17, 2023). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 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.