Pena De Rivas v. Sessions, No. 17-1123 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CasePetitioner and her children petitioned for review of the BIA's order denying their applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court held that there was no legal error as to petitioner's petition and that substantial evidence supported the Board's decision that her proposed social group (targeted gang girlfriends or witnesses who report crimes to the police) lacked particularity and was not cognizable. Furthermore, the record did not support a conclusion that a family relationship was a central reason for petitioner's persecution, and she failed to meet her burden of proof on her CAT claim. Therefore, the court denied her petition for review. In regard to the children's petition, the court held that the record showed they presented independent applications, but the Board failed to decide the applications separately from their mother's. Therefore, the court granted their petitions for review and remanded their cases for further consideration.
Court Description: Colloton, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge and Murphy, Circuit Judge] Petition for Review - Immigration. This opinion is issued by Chief Judge Smith and Judge Colloton pursuant to 8th Cir. R. 47E. In reviewing petitioner's asylum claim, the BIA did not err in determining petitioner's proposed social group - targeted gang girlfriends - lacked particularity and was not socially distinct; nor did the BIA err in concluding her second proposed group - witnesses who report crimes to the police - was not cognizable; the record does not support a conclusion that a family relationship was a central reason for petitioner's persecution; petitioner also failed to meet her burden of proof on her CAT claim; the petitioner's children raised at least one unique basis for relief and requested an independent evaluation of their claims, and IJ erred in determining the children had not filed separate applications; the Board failed to decide the children's applications separately from their mother's, and matter must be remanded for further proceedings on the children's applications.
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.