Background
Petitioners, natives and citizens of Guatemala, sought review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order upholding an immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. The immigration judge found the petitioner not credible due to inconsistencies in her testimony regarding key incidents of persecution.
The court’s reasoning
The court applied the substantial evidence standard to review the denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture protection. The court found substantial evidence supported the adverse credibility determination because the petitioner provided inconsistent accounts of who was present during a home fire incident. The petitioner also failed to submit reasonably available corroborating evidence for claims that her family members in California were abused. Because the underlying testimony was not credible, the court found no evidence in the record compelling a finding of a likelihood of future torture.
What it means going forward
The denial of the petition leaves in place the removal order and the denial of all forms of relief sought by the Guatemalan nationals.