Court Opinion

ID: 9946000
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-28 21:01:05.239199+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:24:21.185986
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1323      Doc: 25         Filed: 02/27/2024     Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 23-1323

        SILVIA ARACELY CASTRO-CARRILLO,

                             Petitioner,

                      v.

        MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

                             Respondent.

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

        Submitted: February 8, 2024                                  Decided: February 27, 2024

        Before GREGORY and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Arnedo S. Valera, LAW OFFICES OF VALERA & ASSOCIATES P.C.,
        Fairfax, Virginia, for Petitioner. Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney
        General, Anthony C. Payne, Assistant Director, Jeffery R. Leist, Senior Litigation Counsel,
        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        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 23-1323      Doc: 25          Filed: 02/27/2024     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Silvia Aracely Castro-Carrillo, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for

        review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing her appeal from the

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

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

        Castro-Carrillo’s claims and conclude that the evidence does not compel a ruling contrary

        to any of the administrative factual findings. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). We also conclude

        that substantial evidence supports the finding that Castro-Carrillo did not establish that her

        fear of returning to Guatemala was objectively reasonable. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502

        U.S. 478, 481 (1992) (stating standard of review); Ai Hua Chen v. Holder, 742 F.3d 171,

        178-79 (4th Cir. 2014) (stating components of well-founded fear of persecution). We

        further conclude that the Board did not improperly overlook Castro-Carrillo’s claim that

        she feared persecution on account of her membership in a particular social group. And we

        conclude that the IJ’s analysis of the aggregate risk of torture was sufficient and that

        substantial evidence supports the denial of protection under the CAT. Accordingly, we

        deny the petition for review. 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