9th Cir.

Lina Gomez Parra v. Todd Blanche

July 10, 2026 ·20-72685 ·Unpublished · By Raj Patel

The Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review challenging an immigration judge's denial of asylum and withholding of removal. The court found the petitioner waived her right to counsel and failed to provide substantial evidence of government acquiescence to torture.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:13

Background

Lina Maria Gomez Parra petitioned for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision dismissing her appeal of an immigration judge’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. She challenged the BIA’s conclusion that she waived her right to counsel and that no additional continuances were warranted.

The court’s reasoning

The court reviewed the immigration judge’s denial of a continuance for abuse of discretion and the agency’s denial of relief for substantial evidence. The court found the petitioner knowingly waived her right to counsel at the initial hearing and was given eight months to secure representation. The court held that the petitioner forfeited her asylum and withholding claims by failing to specifically address the dispositive issue of the Colombian government’s ability to protect her. Finally, the court found substantial evidence supported the denial of Convention Against Torture relief because generalized evidence of government-criminal collaboration was insufficient to establish government acquiescence.

What it means going forward

The petition for review is denied, leaving the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing the petitioner’s claims in place.