Yolanda Garcia-Martinez v. Merrick Garland
This text of Yolanda Garcia-Martinez v. Merrick Garland (Yolanda Garcia-Martinez v. Merrick Garland) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1816 Doc: 18 Filed: 07/11/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1816
YOLANDA GARCIA-MARTINEZ,
Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.
Submitted: May 22, 2024 Decided: July 11, 2024
Before GREGORY, AGEE, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Mark J. Devine, Charleston, South Carolina, for Petitioner. Brian Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Shelley R. Goad, Assistant Director, Laura Halliday Hickein, Senior 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 23-1816 Doc: 18 Filed: 07/11/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Yolanda Garcia-Martinez, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of
an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) finding that the immigration judge
(“IJ”) properly denied her motion for a continuance and dismissing her appeal from the
IJ’s decision denying her applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection
under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We deny the petition for review.
We have reviewed the record and the agency’s decisions and conclude that the
denial of Garcia-Martinez’s motion for a continuance was not an abuse of discretion. See
Gonzalez v. Garland, 16 F.4th 131, 144 (4th Cir. 2021) (stating standard of review). We
further conclude that the adverse credibility finding is supported by substantial evidence.
See Munyakazi v. Lynch, 829 F.3d 291, 298 (4th Cir. 2016) (stating standard of review).
We also conclude that substantial evidence supports the denial of protection under the
CAT. See Ponce-Flores v. Garland, 80 F.4th 480, 484 (4th Cir. 2023) (stating standard of
review). Garcia-Martinez failed to present credible evidence that it is more likely than not
that she will be tortured if she returns to Honduras. We conclude that her remaining issues
lack merit.
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
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Yolanda Garcia-Martinez v. Merrick Garland, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yolanda-garcia-martinez-v-merrick-garland-ca4-2024.