MIGUEL GONZALEZ JUAREZ V. JEFFERSON SESSIONS, III, No. 16-73122 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION NOV 5 2018 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MIGUEL GONZALEZ JUAREZ, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 16-73122 Agency No. A096-052-394 v. MEMORANDUM* JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted October 22, 2018** Before: SILVERMAN, GRABER, and GOULD, Circuit Judges. Miguel Gonzalez Juarez, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act, Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on the omission from Gonzalez Juarez’s declaration of police involvement in his kidnapping, and on an inconsistency between Gonzalez Juarez’s testimony and his declaration as to whether he was robbed. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under the “totality of the circumstances”). Gonzalez Juarez’s explanations do not compel a contrary result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible testimony, in this case, Gonzalez Juarez’s withholding of removal claim fails. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003). Further, Gonzalez Juarez’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same testimony the agency found not credible, and the record does not otherwise compel the conclusion that it is more likely than not he would be tortured if returned to Mexico. See id. at 1156-57. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 16-73122
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.
