[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 1- 16 16 3 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Agen cy No. A0 78 -9 37 -6 26

OMAR ULISES EUCEDA, Pet it io ne r, ve rs us U.S. ATTO RNEY GENERAL, Res po nd en t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Pet it io n fo r Rev ie w of aDeci si on of t he Bo ardof I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Oct ob er 4 , 20 12 ) Befo re CARNES, M ARCUS, an d P RYOR, Ci rcu itJu dg es . PER CURI AM: Om ar Eu ced a se ek s re vi ew of th e Bo ardof I m

m ig rat io n Ap pe al s’ ord er Case: 11-16163 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 Page: 1 of 7di sm is si ng hi s ap pe al of t he Im m ig rat io n J ud ge ’s den ia l o f hi s ap pl ic at io n fo r withh ol di ng of r em ov al . Euce daco nt en ds th atth e BIA an d IJ erre d i n fi nd in g 1 hi m no t cr ed ib le . He als o c on te nd s tha t s ub st an ti al ev id en ce d idno t s up po rt t he BIA an d IJ ’s con cl us io ns th athe fai le d t o s ho w pas t p ers ecu ti on or ali ke li ho odof fu tu re p ers ecu ti on be cau se of h is ho m os ex ua li ty. I. Euc ed a, a n at iv e an d c it iz enof Ho ndur as , il le ga ll y en te redth e Uni te d S ta te s in 20 00 . Bor de r pa tro l caug hthi m th atsame day

an d re po rte d t ha t Eu ced a to ld th em he ha d e nt eredth e Uni te d S ta te s t o t rav el to Durh am , North C aro li nato sp eakwith apo li ce d et ect iv e an d t he di st ric t at to rn ey ab ou t h is bro th er’s d eath. An i m m ig rat io n ju dg e o rd eredEuce darem ov edin20 09 . Abo uta y ear l at er, h e returne d t o t he Uni te d S ta te s. Th e Dep art m en t o f Hom el an d S ecu rity

ch arg edEuce dawith b ei ng subjec t t o re m ov al un de r 8 U.S.C . § 1 23 1( a)(5 ) as anali enwho il le ga ll y reen te redth e Uni te d S ta te s af te r havi ng be enrem ov ed . DHS con du ct eda reas on ab le fear in te rv ie w, at wh ic h Eu ced a sa id he was a frai d t o re tu rnto Hon du ras be cau se he is ga y an d t ha t p eo pl e in Hon du ras

Euce da also sought relief unde r the United N ations Convention Aga inst Torture, which 1 the B IA denied. H e does not a rgue in his openingbrief that the BI A er red in de nying CAT r elief, and as a result he ha s abandone d that issue. Al Najjar v. Ashcrof

t, 257 F.3d 1262, 1283 (11th Cir. 2001). 2

Case: 11-16163 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 Page: 2 of 7ha ve be enatt ack edbe cau se th ey are g ay . He als o s ai d h e was afra idth athi s fo rm er p artne r wan te d t o k il l h im . Euc ed a fo rm al ly app li edforwithh ol di ng of r em ov al , andth e IJhe lda m eri ts he ari ng . Euced a p res en te d t he fol lo win g e vi de nc e th athe wou ldbe subjec t to pe rs ecu ti on if re tu rn edto Hon du ras : h is owntes ti m on y , a 20 10 Depa rtment o f St at e Co un try Repo rt i n s up po rt o f hi s cl ai m th atth ere i s a p at te rnor p ract ic e o f pe rs ecu ti on of Les bi an , Gay , Bis ex ua l, an d Tra ns ge nd er (LGBT) p ers on s i n Hon du ras , andex pe rt t es ti m on y th atHon du ranoff

ic ia ls are co m

pl ic itinth e pe rs ecu ti on of t he LGBT comm un it y . The IJ d en ie d Eu ced a’s ap pl ic at io n fo r withh ol di ng of r em ov al , fin di ng th at he was n otcred ib le an d t ha t h e o ffer edin su ffi ci en t co rro bo rat in g e vi de nc e to ov erco m e th is lac k o f cre di bi li ty. The IJ als o fo un d t ha t ev enif Eu ced a were cred ib le , he f

ai le d t o s ho w pas t p ers ecu ti on or t he li ke li ho odof f utur e p ers ecu ti on . The BIA ag reedan d d is m is se d Eu ced a’s ap pe al , andhe ha s p et it io ne d t hi s C ou rt fo r rev ie w. II.

“ Whe n t he BIA is su es a de ci si on we rev ie w on ly tha t d eci si on , exc ep t t o t he ex te ntth atitex pr es sl y

ad op ts th e imm ig rat io n ju dg e’s de ci si on .” Sav ou ry v. U.S. Att ’y Gen., 4 49 F.3d13 07 , 13 12 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ). “ To the ex te ntth atth e BIA 3 Case: 11-16163 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 Page: 3 of 7do es ad op t the IJ’s re as on in g, we re vi ew th e IJ ’s reas on in g a s wel l.” Id . In thi s

cas e th e BIA b as ic al ly ado pt edth e IJ ’s reas on in g, ev enth ou gh itres ta te d s om e o f th e IJ ’s reas on s fo r de nyin g Eu ced a’s ap pl ic at io n fo r withh ol di ng of r em ov al , so we wil l re vi ew bo th de ci si on s. W e rev ie w factua l fi nd in gs , in cl ud in g c red ib il ity de te rm in at io ns , un de r th e subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce s tand ard , andwe “ m us t af firm th e BIA’s d eci si on if i t i s supp orte d b y

reas on ab le , subs ta nt ia l, an d p ro ba ti ve ev id en ce o n t he reco rd co ns id eredas awho le .” Al Najjar v. As hc ro ft, 2 57 F.3d12 62 , 12 83 –8 4 (1 1t h C ir. 20 01 ) (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s o mit te d) . In o th er wo rd s, we wi ll rev ers e th e BIA an d IJ on ly if th e rec or d c om pe ls rev ers al . See Fah im v. U.S. Att ’y

Gen., 2 78 F.3d 12 16 , 12 18 (11 th Cir . 20 02 ). To o bt ai n wi th ho ld in g o f rem ov al , an app li can t m us t es tabl is h t ha t h is “ li fe orfree do m

wou ldbe th reat en edinth atco un try becaus e o f [h is ] race , rel ig io n, na ti on al it y , m em

be rs hi p i n apa rti cu la r so ci al gro up , or p ol it ic al op in io n.” 8 U.S.C. § 1 23 1( b) (3 )(A). “ The ali enbe ars th e b ur de n o f de m on st rat in g tha t i t i s m or e li ke ly tha n n ot[he ] wil l b e p ers ecu te d o r to rtu redup on be in g re tu rn edto [h is ] co un try.” Tan v . U.S. Att’y Gen., 4 46 F.3d13 69 , 13 75 (11 th Cir . 20 06 ) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s o mitte d) . An ap pl ic an t ca n m eetth is bu rd enby sho win g ei th er: (1) pa stpe rs ecu ti oninhi s co un try bas edon a pr ot ect edgro un d o r (2 ) th atit 4 Case: 11-16163 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 Page: 4 of 7is m or e li ke ly tha n n othe wil l b e p ers ecu te d b as edon a pr ot ect edgro un d upo n

rem ov al to hi s h om e co un try. Id. In s ho win g ali ke li ho odof f utur e p ers ecu ti on , anap pl ic an t n eedno t s ho w th athe wil l b e si ng le d o utfor pe rs ecu ti on if h e can sh ow a “ pa tt ernor p ract ic e” i n h is co un try of “pe rs ecu ti on of agro up of p ers on s si mil arl y si tu at edto th e ap pl ic an t.” 8 C.F.R. § 20 8.1 6( b) (2 )(i ). Whi le th e ap pl ic an t’s cr ed ib le tes ti m on y alo ne m ay

be en ou gh to m eethi s bu rd enof p ro of

inest ab li sh in g h is eli gi bi li ty for rel ie f fro m rem ov al , an a dv ers e cred ib il it y

de te rm in at io n m ay

be en ou gh to de ny reli ef wh ere t he re i s n o o th er ev id en ce o f pe rs ecu ti on . Forg ue v. U.S. Att ’y Gen. 4 01 F.3d12 82 , 12 87 (11 th Ci r. 20 05 ). The IJ m

us t o ffer“ sp eci fic , cog en t re as on s fo r anadve rs e cre di bi li ty fin di ng .” Id . A. Inth is cas e, th e BIA an d IJ pro vi de d s pe ci fic , cog en t re as on s fo r th e adve rs e cred ib il it y

de te rm in at io n, wh ic h a re s up po rte d b y subs ta nt ia l ev id en ce. Fi rs t, the BIA an d IJ fou ndth atEuce dato ldin co ns is te ntst or ie s ab ou t wh y he fir sten te red th e Uni te d S ta te s i n 2 00 0. Whenhe was c au gh t b y bo rd er p atro l i n 2 00 0, h e sa id he was t rav el in g t o No rth Caro li nato m eetwith t he di st ric t at to rn ey an d apo li ce de te ct iv e ab ou t h is bro th er’s d eath. Be fo re the IJ, h owe ve r, Euce dates ti fie d t ha t he fle d t o t he Uni te d S ta te s af te r be in g b eat enby his ex -p artne r, San to s To rres ,

5 Case: 11-16163 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 Page: 5 of 7an d To rres ’ fel lo w gan g m em be rs . Seco nd , th e BIA an d IJ no te d i nc on si st en ci es be twee n Eu ced a’s te st im on y inhi s re as on ab le fearin te rv ie w andhi s t es ti m on y be fo re the IJ. Fo r ex am

pl e, du rin g h is reas on ab le fear in te rv ie w, Euced a st at ed th athe fear edreturni ng to Hon du ras be cau se hi s h al f-b ro th er an d To rres ha d th reat en edto ha rm

hi m . Befo re the IJ, h owe ve r, Euce dates ti fie d t ha t h e fea red returni ng to Hon du ras si m pl y be cau se he is ga y . The BI A andIJ a ls o fo un d i t si gn ifi can t tha t Eu ced a te st ifi edbe fo re the IJ tha t h e h adwitne ss edth e Hon du ran po li ce en ga ge invi ol en ce ag ai ns t p eo pl e inth e LGBT co m m un ity onsev eral oc cas io ns , bu t h e d idno t m en ti on any of t ho se in ci de nt s dur in g h is reas on ab le fear in te rv ie w. Thir d, the BIA an d IJ fou ndth atcri ti cal pa rts of Eu ced a’s te st im on y were i m pl au si bl e an d l ack in g i n d et ai l. Bo th th e BIA an d IJ no te d t ha t al th ou gh Euc ed a g av e si gn ifi can t d et ai l ab ou t the ab us e h e cl ai m edto ha ve su ffer edin Hon du ras , he g av e n o d et ai l ab ou t the all eg edatt em pt s o f hi s ab us iv e ex -p artne r Torr es to tra ckhi m

do wn i n t he Uni te d S ta te s an d h aras s h im with p ho ne cal ls . Euc ed a o ffer edno ev id en ce t o c orro bo rat e h is tes ti m on y ab ou t h is pa st pe rs ecu ti on inHon du ras an d i ns te adsubm it te d o nl y ge ne ral ev id en ce ab ou t the co nd it io ns inth atco un try. W itho utco rro bo rat in g e vi de nc e to supp ort h is cla im of pa stpe rs ecu ti on , th e IJ ’s adv ers e cre di bi li ty det erm in at io n was en ou gh to supp ort th e fi nd in g t ha t Eu ced a d idno t qua li fy forwithh ol di ng of r em ov al ba se d o n p as t 6 Case: 11-16163 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 Page: 6 of 7pe rs ecu ti on . Forg ue , 40 1 F .3dat 1 28 7. B.

The IJ a ndBIA al so di d n oterr i n c on cl ud in g tha t, ev enif c red ib le , Euce da di d n otest ab li sh a li ke li ho odof f utur e p ers ecu ti on be cau se he fai le d t o e st ab li sh a pa tt ernor p ract ic e o f pe rs ecu ti on by the Hon du rango ve rn m en t o r fo rces itis un ab le or u nwi ll in g t o c on tro l. The BIA an d IJ rel ie d o n the 20 10 Depa rtment o f St at e Co un try Repo rt i n fi nd in g t ha t, wh il e th ere m ay be a pa tt ernof v io le nc e ag ai ns t LGBT p ers on s i n Ho ndur as , th e g ov ern m en t i s n ei th er u nwi ll in g n or un ab le to co nt ro l thi s v io le nc e. The re po rt g iv es sp eci fic ex am pl es sh owi ng th at th e g ov ern m en t h as pro se cu te d b ot h p ol ic e o ffi cers an d p riv at e p ers on s wh o co m m it te d a ct s o f vi ol en ce ag ai ns t the LGBT com m un it y . The IJ a ndBIA were “ en ti tl edto rel y he av il y on ” th e St at e Dep art m en t’s Co un try Repo rt, R ey es -San ch ez v . U.S. Att’y Gen., 3 69 F.3d12 39 , 12 43 (11 th Ci r. 20 04 ), an d wh il e th e Co un try Repo rt i n t hi s ca se cit es on ly a few exam pl es of pr os ecu ti on s, i t al so st at es th at“ [t]he pro se cu to r of te n e nc ou nt eredser io us di ffi cu lt ie s i n i nv es ti ga ti ng su sp ic io us de aths of LGBT p ers on s b ecau se th e vi ct im s h adco nc eal edth ei r id en ti ty or se xu al ori en ta ti on .” The C ou nt ry Rep ort ta ke n a s a wh ol e p ro vi de s s ub st an ti al ev id en ce t o s up po rt the BIA an d IJ ’s fin di ng th atth ere i s n o p at te rnor p ract ic e o f pe rs ecu ti on of LGBT p ers on s i n Ho ndur as . PETI TI ON DENI ED. 7 Case: 11-16163 Date Filed: 10/04/2012 Page: 7 of 7