Obed Hernandez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: A205-828-426 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999626933].. [14-2367]
Appeal: 14-2367
Doc: 22
Filed: 07/24/2015
Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-2367
OBED RAMOS HERNANDEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals.
Submitted:
July 6, 2015
Decided:
July 24, 2015
Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Dean E. Wanderer, DEAN E. WANDERER & ASSOCIATES, Fairfax, Virginia,
for Petitioner. Benjamin C. Mizer, Principal Deputy Assistant
Attorney General, Cindy S. Ferrier, Assistant Director, Brendan P.
Hogan, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 14-2367
Doc: 22
Filed: 07/24/2015
Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Obed Ramos Hernandez, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration
Appeals (“Board”), dismissing his appeal from the immigration
judge’s order finding him removable and denying his applications
for asylum, withholding of removal, and withholding under the
Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny the petition for
review. *
Hernandez
first
challenges
his
removability
as
an
alien
convicted of an act involving moral turpitude, arguing that his
forgery conviction was not a crime involving moral turpitude.
It
is uncontested, however, that Hernandez is removable for having
entered this country without being admitted or paroled. See 8
U.S.C.
§
1182(a)(6)(A)(i)
(2012).
Accordingly,
we
need
not
consider whether he is also removable on other grounds.
Hernandez also challenges the denial of his request for
withholding of removal. “[A]dministrative findings of fact are
conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to
conclude to the contrary.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012).
A
determination regarding eligibility for withholding of removal is
affirmed
if
supported
by
substantial
*
evidence
in
the
record
Hernandez does not challenge the denial of asylum or
protection under the CAT. Thus, review of those decisions is
waived. Karimi v. Holder, 715 F.3d 561, 565 n.2 (4th Cir.
2013).
2
Appeal: 14-2367
Doc: 22
Filed: 07/24/2015
Pg: 3 of 3
considered as a whole. INS v. Elias Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481
(1992). We conclude that substantial evidence supports the finding
that Hernandez did not meet his burden of proof for withholding of
removal.
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
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?