Chilel v. Holder, No. 14-1936 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseChilel, born in 1986, in Guatemala, was threatened and stabbed in the arm when he refused to join a gang in 2008. He informed the police, but he did not seek medical treatment. Chilel waited several months before entering the U.S. in 2009. In 2010, Chilel was taken into Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency custody, charged with providing false information and having forged identification. He applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. Chilel testified about his altercation with the gang, conceding that he did not know the result of the police investigation. He testified that he had received a letter from his sister describing a feud near his hometown. His mother told him “everything was bad” and that he should stay in the United States. The IJ denied the application for asylum as time-barred and not satisfying a statutory exception to the one-year limitation and denied withholding of removal and CAT relief on the merits. The BIA affirmed: Chilel failed to demonstrate changed circumstances under 8 U.S.C. 1158(a)(2)(D); failed to establish his membership in a distinct social group for purposes of withholding of removal; and did not establish the Guatemalan government harmed him for purposes of the CAT. The Eighth Circuit denied review.
Court Description: Petition for Review - Immigration. When an IJ has determined that the untimeliness of an applicant's asylum application was not excused by exceptional circumstances or changed conditions within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. Sec. 1158(a)(2)(D), the court lacks jurisdiction to review the applicant's asylum claim; with respect to petitioner's application for withholding of removal, he failed to show that he was a member of a particular social group, as his claim that he was part of a social group made up of individuals who suffer gang violence did not qualify him as a member of a particular social group; claim that he was also subject to persecution because he is a member of the Mam ethnic group was raised for the first time in this petition and would not be considered; claim that the IJ was required to develop the record because petitioner spoke both in Spanish and Mam rejected as it was not raised before the BIA and was not exhausted; petitioner failed to present a case of willful non-intervention by law enforcement sufficient to meet CAT requirements. [ March 09, 2015
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.