Sandra Zelaya v. Loretta E. Lynch ( 2015 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 20 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SANDRA JONNY ZELAYA, No. 13-71857
Petitioner, Agency No. A200-695-964
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted October 14, 2015**
Before: SILVERMAN, BYBEE, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.
Sandra Jonny Zelaya, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing her appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying her application for withholding of removal
and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
jurisdiction 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,
1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the omission of four instances of mistreatment from Zelaya’s declaration,
as well as her conviction for a crime involving fraud. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at
1048 (adverse credibility determination was reasonable under the totality of
circumstances); see also Kin v. Holder, 595 F.3d 1050, 1056-57 (9th Cir. 2010)
(omission from asylum application of participation in political demonstration
supported adverse credibility determination); see also Unuakhaulu v. Gonzales,
416 F.3d 931, 938–39 (9th Cir. 2005) (criminal conviction involving fraud
undermined credibility).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of Zelaya’s CAT
claim because it was based on the same statements that were found not credible,
and the record does not otherwise compel the finding that it is more likely than not
she would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if
returned to El Salvador. See Shrestha, 590 F.3d at 1048-49. We reject Zelaya’s
contention that the agency failed to consider the country reports evidence and
2 13-71857
Salvadorian political climate in denying her application. See Fernandez v.
Gonzalez, 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2006) (petitioner did not overcome
presumption BIA reviewed the record).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 13-71857