Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-24-60305/USCOURTS-ca5-24-60305-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alba Rosalinda Garcia Perez De Molina
Petitioner
Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General
Respondent
Dayana Roseth Molina Garcia
Petitioner

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit ____________

No. 24-60305

Summary Calendar

____________

Alba Rosalinda Garcia Perez De Molina; Dayana Roseth 

Molina Garcia, 

Petitioners,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, 

Respondent.

______________________________

Petition for Review of an Order of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals

Agency Nos. A216 291 551, 

A216 291 552

______________________________

Before Higginson, Oldham, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Alba Rosalinda Garcia Perez De Molina, a native and citizen of 

Guatemala, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals (BIA) dismissing her appeal from an order of an Immigration Judge 

(IJ) denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and 

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

January 13, 2025

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 24-60305 Document: 42-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/13/2025
No. 24-60305

2

protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and ordering her 

removed.1

We review the denial of asylum, withholding, and CAT claims for 

substantial evidence. Zhang v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). 

Pursuant to this standard, we will not disturb the BIA’s decision unless the 

evidence “compels” a contrary conclusion. Id. (quoting Zhao v. Gonzales, 404 

F.3d 295, 306 (5th Cir. 2005)). Perez De Molina has not met this standard.

The BIA concluded, inter alia, that Perez De Molina had not briefed 

any challenge to the IJ’s determination that she had shown neither past 

persecution nor a well-founded fear of future persecution and had thus 

waived the issue. Now, Perez De Molina has abandoned any challenge she 

may have had to the BIA’s waiver determination by failing to brief it. See 

Lopez-Perez v. Garland, 35 F.4th 953, 957 n.1 (5th Cir. 2022). Because past 

persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution is an essential 

element of claims for asylum and withholding, Perez De Molina’s failure to 

make this showing is fatal to these claims, and we need not consider her 

remaining arguments concerning them. See Jaco v. Garland, 24 F.4th 395, 

401 (5th Cir. 2021); Munoz-De Zelaya v. Garland, 80 F.4th 689, 693-94 (5th 

Cir. 2023).

Her challenge to the BIA’s rejection of her CAT claim likewise fails. 

Perez De Molina cites no authority to support her argument that the police’s 

response to the harm her sister faced from gang members, coupled with 

country conditions evidence, demonstrates that Perez De Molina more likely 

than not will be tortured with governmental acquiescence if repatriated. See 

Morales v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 812, 818 (5th Cir. 2017); see also Qorane v. Barr, 

_____________________

1 The other petitioner is Perez De Molina’s minor daughter, who is a derivative on 

her asylum application.

Case: 24-60305 Document: 42-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/13/2025
No. 24-60305

3

919 F.3d 904, 911 (5th Cir. 2019) (holding that “[g]eneralized country 

evidence tells us little about the likelihood state actors will torture any 

particular person”). Accordingly, Perez De Molina has not shown that the 

evidence compels a conclusion contrary to that of the BIA on her CAT claim. 

See Zhang, 432 F.3d at 344. The petition for review is DENIED.

Case: 24-60305 Document: 42-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 01/13/2025