FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT AUG 6, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ 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- 15387 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ A ge nc yN os . A 95- 226- 650 A 95- 226- 651 M A U R I C I O R E N G I F O G U T I E R R E Z , A N A M A R I E L L A B O L A N O S M O R E N O , P e titio n e r s , 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 6, 2007) B efo re B L A C K , M A R C U S an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: M au r ic io R e n g if

o G u ite rr e z , o n b e h a lf

o f h im s e lf a n dh is w if

e , A n aM a r ie lla2

B ol a ños M or e no, both c i t i z e ns of C ol om bi a , pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of

the or de rof

the B oa r d of I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s tha ta f f i rm e d the de c i s i on of

a n I m m i gr a t i on J udge t o d en y h i s ap p l i cat i o n fo r asyl u m an dw i th h o l d i n g o f rem o v al . B ecau se su b st an t i al ev i d en ce su p p o rt s th e d eci si o n o f th e B o ard o f Im m i g rat i o n A p p eal s, w e de nythe pe t i t i on. I . B AC KG RO UN D R engi fo and h i s w i fe ent er ed the U ni t ed S t at es on S ept em ber 17, 20 01 , as non- i m m i gr a ntvi s i t or s . I n 2002, R e ngi f o f i l e d appl i c a t i ons f

ora s y l um a nd w i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l a nd f

orr e l i e f unde rthe U ni t e d N a t i ons C onve nt i on A gai nstT orture. R engi fo al l eged thathe w as pers ec ut ed by the N at i on al L i b erat i o n A rm y (E L N ) fo r h i s m em b ersh i p i n th e C o l o m b i an L i b eral P arty, part i ci pat i on i n the H ea l th C om m i tt ee for the C om m un i ty A ct i on C ou nci l of L as A m e r ic a s n e ig h b o rh o o d , r o le in r a llie s d e m a n d in g th a t th e E L N r e le a s e h is c o w o rk e r s , a n d r e f

u s a l to c o llab o r a te w ith th e E L N a s ah e a lth c a r e p r o f e s s io n a l. In supp ortof hi s app l i ca t i on , R engi fo subm i tt ed a l ett erfr om the gu er i l l as d e m a n d in g th a t h e jo in th e irc au s e o rb e ap p r e h e n d e d . T h e le tte rw a s p u rp o rte d ly s lidu n d e rth e d o o ro f

R e n g if o ’s r e s id e n c e in C o lo m b iain J a n u a ry2 0 0 1 . A t h is a s y lu m h e a r in g , R e n g if o s u b m itte das e c o n dle tte rth a t h e d e s c r ib e da s th e o r ig in a l. T he se cond l ett erhad i dent i ca l w ordi ng , bu tatl ea ston e typog raph i ca l di ff er ence fr om the fi rs tl ett er . W hen asked abou tthe tw o l ett er s, R engi fo changed h i s s t ory3

a n d te s tif ie d th a t h e r e c e iv e d b o th le tte r s in o n e e n v e lo p e th a t w a s s lidu n d e rh is do or. In hi s app l i ca t i on for r eheari ng , R engi fo al l eged thathe re ce i ved the l ett er thr ough the m a i l f

r om hi s f a m i l yi n C ol om bi aa f

t e rhe ha d f

l e d C ol om bi a . A tno t i me d i d Re n g i f

o e x p l a i n w h yth e r e w e r e tw o a l mo s ti d e n t i c a l c o p i e s o f th e s a me le tte r . Ba s e d o n Re n g i f

o ’ s i n ab i l i tyt o e x p l a i n th e d i f f e r i n g v e r s i o n s o f

th e s a me l ett er , the IJdi sc re di t ed R engi fo’ s t es t i m on y and deni ed hi s app l i ca t i on . T he IJ f ound tha tthe l e tt e r s w e r e l i ke l yf abr i c a t e d. T he B I A a f

f i rm e d the de c i s i on of

the I Ja nd f ound a l t e rna t i ve l ytha tR e ngi f o f a i l e d t o e s t abl i s h pe r s e c ut i on on a c c ountof hi s pol i t i c a l opi ni on. R e ngi f o appe a l s onl ythe de ni a l of hi s appl i c a t i on f

ora s y l um a nd w i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l . H e doe s notc ha l l e nge the de ni a l of hi s r e que s tf

or r e lie f u n d e rth e C A T . I I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW W e r e v ie w o n lyth e d e c is io n o f th e B I A , e x c e p t to th e e x te n t th a t it e x p r e s s ly adop t s the op i ni on of the IJ . A l N ajj arv. A shcr oft , 25 7 F . 3d 12 62 , 12 84 (11th C i r. 20 01 ). W e r evi ew fa ctual det erm i nat i on s of the B IA un der the subst ant i al evi dence t es t . S epul veda v. U . S . A tt ’ y G en. , 40 1 F . 3d 12 26 , 12 30 (11th C i r. 2 0 0 5 ) . “A d m in is tr a tiv e f in d in g s o f

f a c t a r e c o n c lu s iv e u n le s s a n yr e a s o n ab le a d ju d ic a to rw o u ldb e c o m p e lle d to c o n c lu d e to th e c o n tr a ry .” 8 U .S .C . § 1 25 2(b)(4)(B). “ T he tri erof fa ctm ustdet erm i ne cr edi bi l i ty, and thi s [ C ] ou rt4

m a yn o t s u b s titu te its ju d g m e n t f o rth a t o f th e B I A w ith r e s p e c t to c r e d ib ility fi nd i ng s. ” D -M uh um ed v. U . S . A tt ’ y G en. , 38 8 F . 3d 81 4, 81 8 (11 th C i r. 20 04 ). I I I . DI S CUS S I ON R e ngi f o c ont e nds tha tthe B I A e rr one ous l yde ni e d hi s appl i c a t i on f ora s y l um a nd w i thhol di ng of

r e m ova l . W e di s a gr e e . S ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the a d v e r s e c r e d i b i l i tyd e t e rm i n a t i o n b yth e B I A. T h e r e c o r d d o e s n o t c o m p e l af in d in g th a t R e n g if

o ’s te s tim o n yw a s c r e d ib le . R e n g if o p r o v id e d d if

f e r in g a c c o u n ts to e x p la in th e e x is te n c e o f tw o n e a r ly i de nt i c a l l e tt e r s R e ngi f

o s uppos e dl yr e c e i ve d f r om gue r i l l a s , a nd a f

t e rthe de c i s i on of the IJ , R engi fo offe re d a thi rd expl anat i on re gardi ng w hy the t extof the l ett er s w a s di f f e r e nt . G i ve n the s e i nc ons i s t e nta c c ount s , s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e s upport s the advers e c re di bi l i ty det erm i nat i on , i ncl ud i ng the fi nd i ng thatR engi fo fabri ca t ed e v id e n c e . T h is ad v er se cr ed ib il ity d eter m in atio n alo n e s u p p o rts th e d en ial o f R en g ifo ’s p e titio n f o ra s y lu m a n d w ith h o ld in g o f r e m o v a l. A lth o u g h a n I Jm u s t c o n s id e r“a ll e vi de nc e i ntr oduc e d by[ a n] appl i c a nt , ” “ [ a ] n a dve r s e c r e di bi l i tyde t e rm i na t i on a l one m a ybe s uf

f i c i e ntt o s upportthe de ni a l of a n a s y l um appl i c a t i on. ” F or gue v. A tt’yG e n ., 4 0 1 F .3 d 1 2 8 2 , 1 2 8 7 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . B e c au s e th e a d v e r s e c r e d ib ility d e te rm in a tio n s up p o rts th e d e n ia l o f R e n g if o ’s p e titio n , it is n o t n e c e s s a ryf o ru s to re ac h the al t ernat i ve fi nd i ng of the B IA that R en g i fo fai l ed t o est ab l i sh p ast5

pers ec ut i on or a w el l -f

ou nd ed fe arof future pers ec ut i on base d o n h i s pol i t i ca l o p in io n . I V . CONCL US I ON R e n g if o ’s p e titio n f

o rr e v ie w is DE NI E D.