Court Opinion

ID: 9966053
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-05-03 21:00:39.684557+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:25:08.045072
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1121      Doc: 34         Filed: 05/02/2024    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 23-1121

        KEVIN ALEXANDER FLORES LEMUS,

                            Petitioner,

                     v.

        MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

                            Respondent.

        On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

        Submitted: February 6, 2024                                          Decided: May 2, 2024

        Before WILKINSON, RICHARDSON, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

        Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Eleni R. Bakst, CAPITAL AREA IMMIGRANTS’ RIGHTS (CAIR)
        COALITION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Petitioner. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy
        Assistant Attorney General, Carl McIntyre, Assistant Director, Brooke M. Maurer, Office
        of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF
        JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1121      Doc: 34         Filed: 05/02/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Kevin Alexander Flores Lemus, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for

        review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming without opinion the

        Immigration Judge’s denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and

        protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have reviewed the record and Flores

        Lemus’ claims and conclude that the evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of

        the administrative factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that substantial

        evidence supports the denial of relief, see INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 (1992).

        Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. In re Flores Lemus (B.I.A. Jan. 9, 2023).

        We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

        presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional

        process.

                                                                              PETITION DENIED

                                                     2