FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION APR 11 2014
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARVIN PEREZ-CRUZ, No. 12-73718
Petitioner, Agency No. A094-801-760
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 7, 2014**
Before: TASHIMA, GRABER, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Marvin Perez-Cruz, a native and citizen of Nicaragua, petitions for review of
the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of
removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Our
*
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).
jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
the agency’s factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility
determinations created by the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034,
1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility determination
based on the inconsistencies in the record regarding when Perez-Cruz joined the
Independent Liberal Party, when he first received a death threat by Sandinistas,
whether Sandinistas threatened his brother, and whether Perez-Cruz went to the
hospital after being beaten. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination was
reasonable under the totality of circumstances). We reject Perez-Cruz’s contention
that the inconsistencies were minor. Further, Perez-Cruz’s explanations do not
compel the opposite result. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000).
We lack jurisdiction to consider any contentions Perez-Cruz raises regarding his
interview by a border patrol agent. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th
Cir. 2004) (no jurisdiction over claims not presented in administrative proceedings
below). In the absence of credible testimony, Perez-Cruz’s asylum and
withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156
(9th Cir. 2003).
2 12-73718
Finally, Perez-Cruz’s CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same
statements found not credible, and he does not point to any other evidence in the
record to compel the finding that it is more likely than not he would be tortured by
or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official in Nicaragua. See id. at
1156-57.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
3 12-73718