FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT A ugus t 11, 2006 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 10700 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ B I A N o. A 95- 905- 491 L U I S C A R L O S M O L I N A , P e titio n e r , v ersu s U .S . A T T O RN E Y G E N E R A L , R e s p o n d e n t.

________________________ P e t i t i on f orR e vi e w of

aD e c i s i on of

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls

_________________________ ( A u gu s t 11, 2006) B efo re D U B IN A , H U L L an d M A R C U S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: L ui s C ar l os M ol i na, a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f C ol om bi a, pet i t i on s f or re vi ew of the fi nal order of the B o ard o f I m m i grat i on A pp ea l s ( “ B IA ”) , w hi ch af fi rm ed
w i thoutopi n i o n t h e i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s ( “ I J ’ s ” ) de ni a l of a s y l um unde rtheBe causewe f ind that Molina has not established a c ase f or asy lum under the I

NA, wedo 1 not addre ss his arguments that he also satisfied the higher standard for withholding of removal. See Al Najjar v. Ashcrof

t, 257 F.3d 1262, 1292-93 (11th Cir. 2001). Molina has not appe aled the denial of re lief under th e Un ited Nations Convention Ag ainst Torture a nd Other Crue l, Inhumane or DegradingTrea

tment or Punishment (“CAT” ), and there fore , any claim based on the C AT is deeme d abandone d. Sepulveda v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 401 F .3d 1226, 1228 n.2 (11th Cir. 2005).

2 Im m i grat i on and N at i on al i ty A ct (“ IN A ”)
. O n app ea l , M ol i na ar gu es the IJ erred 1 by de ny i ng a s y l um a ft er fi n di ng tha tM ol i nadi d notde m ons tr a t e pa s tpe r s e c ut i on
oraw e l l
- f

ounde d f e a rof fu tu re pe r s e c ut i on by the R e vol ut i ona ry A rm e d F or c e s of C ol om bi a ( “ F A R C ”) based o n h is m em bers hi p i n the L i bera l P arty or hi s s t atus as
a s up po rt erof pres i denti al ca nd i dat e A l varo U ri be’ s m es sa ge concerni ng the need t o r i d C ol om bi aof

gue r i l l a s . A f

t e rc a r e f ul r e vi e w , w e de ny the pe t i t i on. W he n the B I A i s s ue s a n affi rm an c e w i thoutopi ni on, the I J ’ s de c i s i on be c om e s the f

i na l or de rs ubj ectt o r e vi e w . S e e M e ndoz av. A tt ’ y G e n. , 327 F
. 3d 1283, 1284 n. 1 ( 11th C i r . 2003)
. T o the e xt e nttha tthe I J ’ s de c i s i on w a s ba s e d on
al e ga l de t e rm i na t i on, ourr e vi e w i s d e n o v o . M oha m m e d v. A s hc r of t , 261 F
. 3d 12 44 , 12 47 -48 (11 th C i r. 20 01 ). F ac tual det erm i nat io ns, ho w ever , ar e r evi ew ed
un der the “ hi gh l y def

erent i al subst ant i al evi dence t es t , ” w hi ch re qu i re s us t o “ vi ew th e r e c o r d in th e lig h t m o s t f a v o r ab le to th e [ I J ]’s d e c is io n a n d d r a w a ll r e a s o n ab le i nf e r e nc e s i n f

a vorof tha tde ci si on. ” A de f e m i v. A s hc r of

t , 386 F
. 3d 1022, 10 26 -27 (11 th C i r. 20 04 ) ( en banc), ce rt . deni ed, 12 5 S
. C t . 22 4 5 (2 0 05 ). U nd er th is s ta n d a r d , ad e n ia l o f a s y lu m m a y b e r e v e r s e d o n l y if th e e v id e n c e w o u ld
co m p el a reaso n ab l e fact fi n d er t o f in d th atth e req u i si t e fear o f p ersecu t i o n ex i st s.3

Se e I NS v
. El i a s - Za c a r i a s , 5 0 2 U. S. 4 7 8 , 4 8 1 n . 1 , 1 1 2 S. Ct
. 81 2, 81 5 n
. 1 , 1 1 7 L. E d. 2d 38 (199 2); se e a l so S i l va v. U
. S
. A tt ’ y G en ., 4 4 8 F .3d 1 22 9, 12 36 (11th C i r. 2 0 0 6 ) ( “F in d in g s o f f

a c t m a d e b y th e I m m ig r a tio n J u d g e m a y b e r e v e r s e d b y th is C ou rton l y w he n the r e c or d c ompe l s a r e ve r s a l ; the me r e f a c t tha t the r e c or d m ay
s uppor tac ontr a ry c onc l us i on i s note no ugh t o j us t i f y ar e ve r s a l of

the
a dm i ni s tr a t i ve f

i ndi ngs . ” ( i nt e rn al ci t at i ons a nd quot a t i ons om i tt e d) )
. “ T he tr i e rof f a c tm us tde t e rm i ne c r e di bi l i ty , a nd thi s c our tm a y nots u b st i tut e i t s j udgm e ntf or th at o f th e [ IJ ] w ith re sp ec t to c r e d ib il ity f in d in g s.” D -M u h u m ed v . U .S . A tt ’y G en. , 38 8 F
. 3d 81 4, 81 8 (11 th C i r. 20 04 ). A n a l i e n w ho arri v es i n ori s pr e s e nti n the U ni t e d S t a t e s m a y appl y f or
as yl um . S ee IN A § 2 08 (a )( 1), 8 U
. S
. C
. § 1 15 8(a) (1). T h e A tt o rn eyG ener al has d is c r e tio n to g r a n t a s y lu m if th e a lie n m e e ts th e I N A ’s d e f in itio n o f

a“r e f u g e e .” S e e I N A § 2 0 8 ( b ) ( 1 ) , 8 U
. S
. C
. § 1 1 5 8 ( b ) ( 1 ) . A “r e f u g e e ” is a n y p e r s o n w h o is
u n w il li n g to re tu rn to h is h o m e co u n try o r t o av ail h im se lf o f th a t c o u n try’s pr ot e c t i o n “ b e c a u s e o f p e r s e c u t i o n o raw e l l
- f o u n d e d f

e a ro f p e r s e c u t i o n on
a c c ountof

r a c e , r e l i gi on, na t i ona l i ty , m e m be r s hi p i n apa r t i c u l ar so ci a l gr oup, or p o litic a l o p in io n . . . .” 8 U .S .C . § 1 1 0 1 ( a ) ( 4 2 ) ( A )
. T he as ylum appl i can t c ar ri es the bu rden of prov i ng st atut ory “ re fugee”
s ta tu s . S e e A l N a

jja rv . A s h c r o f

t, 2 5 7 F .3 d 1 2 6 2 , 1 2 8 4 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) ; 8 C .F .R . § 208. 13( a )
. T he appl i c a nts a t i s f i e s thi s bur de n by sh o w i n g, w i th s pe c i f i c a nd4

c r e di bl e e vi de nc e : ( 1) pa s t pe r s e c ut i on on a c c ount of a s t a tut or i l y l i s t e d f a c t or , or (2) a“ w el l -f

ou nd ed fe ar ” thathi s or herst atut ori l y l i st ed fa ct or w i l l cause f uture p ersecu t i o n . 8 C
. F
. R
. § 2 0 8
. 1 3 (a), (b ); A l N ajj ar, 2 5 7 F
. 3 d at1 2 8 7
. “ T o est ab l i sh
as yl um ba s e d on pa s t pe r s e c ut i on , the app l i c a nt mus t pr ov e ( 1) tha t [ ] he w as p e r s e c u te d , a n d ( 2 ) th a t th e p e r s e c u tio n w a s o n a c c o u n t o f a p r o te c te d g r o u n d .” S i l va , 448 F
. 3d a t1 2 36 ( c i t a t i ons om i tt e d)
. “ T o e s t abl i s h e l i gi bi l i ty f ora s y l um base d o n a w el l -f

ou nd ed fe arof future pers ec ut i on , the appl i ca ntm ustprov e ( 1) a

‘ s u bj e c t i ve l y ge nui ne a nd obj e c t i ve l y r e a s onabl e ’ f e a rof pe r s e c ut i on, tha ti s ( 2) on
a c c o u n t o f

ap r o te c te d g r o u n d .” I d . ( c ita tio n s o m itte d )
.

“ [P ] er se cut io n i s a n extre m e c on ce pt , re qu i ri ng m ore than a few i sol at ed in c id e n ts o f

v e rb a l h a r a s s m e n t o rin tim id a tio n [ .]” S e p u lv e d av . U .S . A tt’y G e n ., 40 1 F
. 3d 1 2 2 6 , 123 1 (11 th C i r. 20 05 ) ( i nt ernal qu ot at i on s a nd ci t at i on om i tt ed). T he r e m us t be “ s pe c i f i c , de t a i l e d f

a c t s s how i ng a good r e a s on t o fear t h at[ the p e titio n e r ] w ill b e s in g le d o u t f o rp e r s e c u tio n o n a c c o u n t o f [ h i s p o litic a l] o p in io n .” A l N ajj ar , 25 7 F
. 3d at12 87
. A dd i t i on al l y, w e have hel d that“ evi dence thatei ther i s c o n s is te n t w ith a c ts o f p r iv a te v io le n c e o rth e p e titio n e r 's f a ilu r e to c o o p e r a te
w i th g ueri l l as , or thatm er el y s ho w s thata per son h as been the victim o f c ri m i nal
a c tiv ity , d o e s n o t c o n s titu te e v id e n c e o f p e r s e c u tio n b a s e d o n as ta tu to r ily prot ec t ed gro u n d .” R ui z v. U
. S
. A tt ’ y G en. , 44 0 F
. 3d 12 47 12 57 -58 (11 th C i r. 20 06 ).5

H e r e , s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e s upp or t s the I J ’ s de c i s i on tha tM ol i naw a s not ent i t l ed to as yl um , base d o n ei ther pas tpers ec ut i on or a w el l -f ou nd ed fe arof future p ersecu t i o n , o n a c c o u n to f a p o l i t i cal o p i n i o n . F i rst , th e IJ m ad e an ad v erse
cr edi bi l i t y det er m i nat i on as t o M ol ina’ s t es t i m on y bas ed on i nt er nal i n co n si st en ci es, w h i ch th e IJ sp eci fi ed an d ex p l ai n ed i n h i s o rd er. A n ad v erse
c r e di bi l i ty de t e rm i n at i on a l one w i l l s uppor tthe de ni a l of a s y l um . S e e F or gue v. A tt ’ y G e n. , 401 F
. 3d 1282, 1287 ( 11th C i r . 2005) ; D
- M uhum e d, 388 F
. 3d a t819. M o r e o v e r , th e o n ly e v id e n c e o f M o lin a ’s a lle g e d p a s t p e r s e c u tio n a ttr ib u tab le , w ith
an y d eg ree o f s p e c i fi ci ty, t o th e F A R C co n si st ed o f so m e th reat en i n g p h o n e cal l s, du ri ng w hi ch the F A R C as ked M ol i na t o p ro v i de ce rt ai n i nform at i on , and the theft
o f h is w allet. S im p ly p u t, M o li n a’s m er e r ef u sa l t o co o p er ate w ith th e F A R C ’s de m a nds i s i ns uf

f i c i e ntt o s how pa s tpe r s e c ut i on. S e e S a nc he z v. A tt ’ y G e n. , 392 F
. 3d 434, 437 ( 11th C i r . 2004) ( hol di ng tha t a l i e n di d not e s t abl i s h p astp e r s e c ut i on by F A RC w he r e FA RC ’ s ha r a s s me ntw a s du e t o a l i e n’ s r e f us a l t o c oo pe r a t e r a ther th a n a c tu a l o rim p u te d p o litic a l o p in io n )
. As f o rawe l l
- f

o u n d e d f

e a ro f f u tu r e p e r s e c u t i o n , o th e r t h a n h i s o wn spec ul at i on , M ol i na pres ent ed no evi denc e th athe w ou l d b e harm ed i f he r eturned t o C o l o m b i a . T h e I J n o t e d th a tMo l i n ah a d b e e n g o n e f r o m Co l o mb i a f

o rtwo ( now f our ) y e a r s , a nd no l onge rhe l d the a i r l i ne pos i t i on that g av e h i m a c c e s s t o the i n fo rm at i o n th e F A R C d em an d e d o f h i m d u ri n g th e th reat en i n g p h o n e cal l s.6

B e c a u s e M o lin ad id n o t p r e s e n t “s p e c if ic , d e ta ile d f

a c ts s h o w i n g ag o o d r e a s o n to f e a rtha the
. . . w i l l be si n g l ed o u t forpe r s e c ut i on, ” S e pul ve da , 401 F
. 3d a t1231 (quo t at i on om i tt ed), w e a re no tcom pel l ed t o con cl ud e thatM ol i na has e st abl i shed
ac a s e f o ra s y l u m b a s e d o n aw e l l
- f o u n d e d f e a ro f f u tu r e p e r s e c u t i o n b y th e FA RC. In sum , M ol i na has f

ai l ed t o est ab li sh thatthe re cord com pel s afi nd i ng that the F A R C pe r s e c ut e d h i m , o r t ha the ha d aw e l l
- f ounde d f e a rof f utur e pe r s e c ut i on b y th e F A R C , b e c a u s e o f h is p o litic a l o p in io n , r a th e rth a n s o l e l y o n a c c o u n t o f h is
r e f u s a l to c o o p e r a te . A c c o r d in g ly , w e d e n y th e p e titio n f o rr e v ie w . P E T I T I ON DE NI E D.