Munguia v. Sessions, 053017 FED9, 15-70828

Docket Nº:15-70828
Party Name:HILDA MUNGUIA, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judge Panel:Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:May 30, 2017
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

HILDA MUNGUIA, Petitioner,

v.

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 15-70828

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

May 30, 2017

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Submitted May 24, 2017 [**]

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A096-364-154

Before: THOMAS, Chief Judge, and SILVERMAN and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM [*]

Hilda Munguia, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing her appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying her motion to terminate removal proceedings and ordering her removed. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency's factual findings and review de novo questions of law. Ali v. Holder, 637 F.3d 1025, 1028-29 (9th Cir. 2011). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency's finding that Munguia is removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(E)(i), where she knowingly assisted another alien in seeking entry into the United States in violation of the law. See Altamirano v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 586, 592 (9th Cir. 2005) (requiring an affirmative act of assistance in order to establish alien smuggling).

Contrary to Munguia's contention, the agency did not err by admitting the record of sworn statement, dated August 4, 2005, into evidence, where Munguia did not show that it contained inaccurate information or was obtained by coercion. See Espinoza v. INS, 45 F.3d 308, 310 (9th Cir. 1995) (the sole test for admission of evidence is whether the evidence is probative and its admission is fundamentally fair; information on an authenticated immigration form is presumed to be reliable in the absence of evidence to the contrary presented by the alien); Blanco v. Mukasey, 518 F.3d 714, 721 (9th Cir. 2008) (although deprivation of food and sleep can affect the voluntariness of a confession, petitioner did not establish that his will was overborne).

Substantial evidence supports the agency's adverse credibility determination based on inconsistencies between Munguia's testimony and information...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP