United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 20-60250

Summary Calendar

Yaciel Yulian Camejo Gonzalez, 

Petitioner,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, 

Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A203 496 530

Before Higginbotham, Higginson, and Duncan, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Yaciel Yulian Camejo Gonzalez, a native and citizen of Cuba, petitions 

for review of an order by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissing 

his appeal from the denial of his application for asylum, withholding of 

removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). He 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 15, 2021

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 20-60250 Document: 00516057260 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/15/2021
No. 20-60250

2

challenges the determination that he was competent to proceed in 

immigration proceedings. Because he does not challenge the determination 

that his underlying asylum claim lacked merit or that he was not entitled to 

protection under the CAT, he has abandoned review of these claims. See 

Chambers v. Mukasey, 520 F.3d 445, 448 n.1 (5th Cir. 2008). 

We review the BIA’s decision and consider the immigration judge’s 

decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA. Singh v. Sessions, 880 F.3d 

220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018). Factual findings are reviewed for substantial 

evidence and legal determinations are reviewed de novo. Lopez-Gomez v. 

Ashcroft, 263 F.3d 442, 444 (5th Cir. 2001). 

Aliens in removal proceedings are presumed to be competent to 

participate in those proceedings. Matter of M-A-M-, 25 I & N Dec. 474, 477 

(BIA 2011). However, if an issue implicating mental competency arises, the 

immigration judge must determine whether the alien is competent to 

proceed. Id. at 479. To determine whether an alien is competent to 

participate in immigration proceedings, an immigration judge considers 

“whether he or she has a rational and factual understanding of the nature and 

object of the proceedings, can consult with the attorney or representative if 

there is one, and has a reasonable opportunity to examine and present 

evidence and cross-examine witnesses.” Id. 

Despite Camejo Gonzalez’s assertions to the contrary, the 

immigration judge properly inquired into his level of competency. When he

stated that he was “going a little bit nuts,” the immigration judge

immediately asked what he meant by that statement and inquired into his 

mental state by asking whether he was taking any medication to treat a mental 

illness, whether he understood the nature and purpose of the hearing, and 

whether he understood who the immigration judge was. While Camejo

Gonzalez claims that this inquiry was inadequate, the approach to assess 

Case: 20-60250 Document: 00516057260 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/15/2021
No. 20-60250

3

competency is made on a case by case basis and these questions were 

sufficient to establish that he understood the nature and object of the 

proceedings. See id. at 479-80. Because Camejo Gonzalez presented his 

asylum claim in a cogent manner, was able to answer questions, and indicated 

that he understood what was happening and the role of the court, substantial 

evidence supports the determination that he had “a rational and factual 

understanding of the nature and object of the proceedings.” See id. at 479. 

Accordingly, the BIA did not err in affirming the finding that he was 

competent to proceed.

Based upon the foregoing, the petition for review is DENIED. 

Case: 20-60250 Document: 00516057260 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/15/2021