Case ID: f-appx_584/html/0536-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Miguel Enrique Torres GUTIERREZ, a.k.a. Daniel Cruzado-Torres, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.
    No. 12-71599.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 13, 2014.
    
    Filed Aug. 15, 2014.
    Helen B. Zebel, Esquire, Law Office of Helen B. Zebel, San Francisco, CA, for Petitioner.
    Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, Virginia Lum, OIL, DOJ-U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.
    Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Miguel Enrique Torres Gutierrez, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have 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 BIA’s adverse credibility determiriation, based on the uncontested fact that Torres lied in his immigration hearing and before an asylum officer about his use of a false identity and the location of his sister. See Singh v. Holder, 638 F.3d 1264, 1271-72 (9th Cir.2011) (stating “lies and fraudulent documents when they are no longer necessary for the immediate escape from persecution do support an adverse inference”); see also Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079, 1084 (9th Cir.2011) (agency can rely on factors that reasonably reflect on the petitioner’s veracity). In the absence of credible testimony, Torres’s asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.2003).

Because Torres’s CAT claim is based on the same testimony the BIA found not credible, and Torres does not point to any evidence that compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not he will be tortured if returned to Peru, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at 1156-57.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.