The AI workspace for legal professionals
- Legal research with access to more than 1 million sources
- Document automation
- Matter management
- Hosted in the EU and Switzerland
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
The AI workspace for legal professionals
Try it free for 14 days (10 questions/day during trial)
07-73497•Indrid Yolanda Santos-Canas v. ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General
07-73497Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApr 19, 2010
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision**
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
INDRID YOLANDA SANTOS-CANAS,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 07-73497
Agency No. A097-832-174
MEMORANDUM *
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2010**
Before: RYMER, McKEOWN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Indrid Yolanda Santos-Canas, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order summarily affirming an
immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying her application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
FILED
APR 19 2010
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS
-- 1 of 2 --
07-73497 2
(“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial
evidence adverse credibility findings, Kaur v. Gonzales, 418 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th
Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because the
repeated and significant inconsistencies in Santos-Canas’ testimony and between
her testimony and declaration concern events that go to the heart of her claim. See
Chebcoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir. 2001). In the absence of credible
testimony, Santos-Canas failed to demonstrate eligibility for asylum or
withholding of removal. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir.
2003).
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s denied of CAT relief because Santos-
Canas did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the instigation of, or with the
consent or acquiescence of the Guatemalan government. See Arteaga v. Mukasey,
511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir. 2007).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
-- 2 of 2 --
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.