Court Opinion

ID: 9840308
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-15 21:00:33.514341+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:45:33.729573
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 21-2208      Doc: 21         Filed: 09/14/2023    Pg: 1 of 2

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 21-2208

        ADOLFO MASADIEGO-ALVA, a/k/a Darling Eduardo Merida Merida,

                            Petitioner,

                     v.

        MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

                            Respondent.

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

        Submitted: June 23, 2022                                    Decided: September 14, 2023

        Before KING and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, 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        Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.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, Alexander J. Lutz, Trial Attorney, 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        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 21-2208      Doc: 21         Filed: 09/14/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

               Adolfo Masadiego-Alva, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of

        an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal from the immigration

        judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and

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

        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). We

        further conclude, upon de novo review of the questions of law raised by Masadiego-Alva,

        that the denial of relief was not manifestly contrary to law. See Crespin-Valladares v.

        Holder, 632 F.3d 117, 124 (4th Cir. 2011) (citing 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(C)). 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