T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T L I GI A MAR I A G UZ MAN, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 06- 70353 A ge nc yN o. A 075- 581- 260 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M ay25, 2010 ** B e f o r e : C A N B Y , T H O M A S , an dW . F L E T C H E R , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . L i gi a M ar i a G uzm an, a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f G uat em al a, pet i t i on s f or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng her app ea l fr om an i m m i grat i on j ud ge’ s dec i si on fi nd i ng her r em ov abl e f or part i cipat i ng i n al i en s m uggl i ng. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r8 U . S . C . § 1252. W e r e vi e w de novo 

# FI LED JU N 09 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS06- 70353 2 c la im s o f du e p r o c e s s v io la tio n s , V a s q u ez - Za v a la v . A s h c r o ft , 324 F . 3d 1105, 1107 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) , an dr e v ie w f o rs ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e th e a g e n c y ’s f in d in g s o f

f a c t, U rz ua C ovarrubi as v. G on zales , 487 F . 3d 742, 744 ( 9th C i r . 2007) . W e de nythe p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. S ub st ant i alevi dence s up po rt s the agency’ s det erm i nat i on thatG uzm an part i cipat ed i n al i en sm ug gl i ng w here the re cord cont ai ns G uzm an’ s s w orn s t a t e m e nta dm i tt i ng s he kne w the bi rth c e rt i f i c a t e s he pr e s e nt e d t o the i m m i gr a t i on o f f ic e rd idn o t b e lo n g to th e p a s s e n g e rin h e rv e h ic le . Se e id. at 7 4 4 . T h e d et erm i n at i o n th atG u zm an ’ s sw o rn st at em en tw as n o tco ercedi s al so supp ort ed by subst ant i alevi dence. Se e Cu e v a s - O r teg a v . I NS , 588 F . 2d 1274, 1 2 7 8 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 7 9 ) ( “th e b ar e a s s e rtio n th a t as ta te m e n t is in v o lu n taryis i nsuffi ci ent ” t o p rove coerc i on ); s e e a l s o Es p i n o z a v . I

NS , 4 5 F .3 d3 0 8 , 3 1 0 ( 9 th Ci r . 1 9 9 5 ) ( “ Th e b u r d e n o f e s t ab l i s h i n g ab a s i s f

o re x c l u s i o n o f

e v i d e n c e f

r o m a go vernm entre cord fal l s on the op po nentof the evi dence, w ho m ustcom e f orw ar d w i th eno ug h n egat i ve fa ct ors t o p er suade the courtno tt o adm i ti t . ”) G uz m an’ s due pr oc e s s r i ght s w e r e notvi ol a t e d bythe a dm i s s i on of the s m uggl e d a l i e n’ s F orm I - 213 be c aus e the f orm w a s pr oba t i ve a nd i t s a dm i s s i on w a s f u n d a m e n ta llyf

a ir . Se e id. a t310 ( not i ng tha t“ [ t ] he s ol e t e s tf ora dm i s s i on of e v id e n c e [ in ad e p o rta tio n p r o c e e d in g ] is w h e th e rth e e v id e n c e is p r o b a tiv e a n dits06- 70353 3 adm i ss i on i s f

un dam ent al l y f

ai r, ” and re

j ec t i ng the ar gu m entthata F orm I- 21 3 w as in a d m is s ib le a s h e ar s ay ) . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.