Daniel Ferrer-Rodriguez, a native of Venezuela who also holds Colombian citizenship, and his minor daughter, Daniellys Ferrer-Maestre, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Ferrer-Rodriguez claimed persecution based on his political opinion and his status as a former member of the Venezuelan army. He argued that if returned to Colombia, he would be extradited to Venezuela and tortured. An Immigration Judge denied their applications, and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed their appeal. The petitioners then sought review in the Ninth Circuit, challenging the agency's factual findings regarding their safety in Colombia and the risk of removal to Venezuela.
The panel applied the substantial evidence standard, under which administrative findings are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude to the contrary. For dual nationals, the court reiterated that a petitioner must demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution in both countries to qualify for relief. The court found substantial evidence supporting the agency's determination that Ferrer-Rodriguez was not a refugee because he could safely relocate to Colombia. The record showed that Ferrer-Rodrigrez had lived in Colombia for several years without suffering harm or facing threats of removal to Venezuela. The court noted that Ferrer-Rodriguez conceded in his briefs that he did not suffer direct harm during his prior stay in Colombia. Consequently, the court rejected his claims for asylum and withholding of removal regarding Colombia. Regarding CAT relief, the court held that Ferrer-Rodriguez failed to prove it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if removed to Colombia. Although he argued that Colombia returns Venezuelan army deserters to Venezuela, the court found no evidence that Colombia extradites individuals who are also Colombian citizens. The court declined to adopt contrary precedent from other circuits, stating it is bound by its own precedent.
The petition for review is denied, affirming the BIA's order dismissing the applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection. The petitioners remain subject to removal. The stay of removal remains in place until the mandate issues. The decision reinforces the requirement for dual nationals to prove persecution in both countries of nationality and clarifies that prior safe residence in one country can defeat claims of future persecution or torture in that country.
Podcast (federal-narrative-summaries): Play in new window | Download