Hernandez v. Garland, 66 F.4th 94

Oscar Hernandez, a Mexican national married to a U.S. citizen, has a criminal history including two domestic-violence–related convictions (2009 assault; 2016 disorderly conduct arising from domestic incidents), plus DUI and vehicle offenses.
DHS initiated removal after Hernandez’s 2016 arrest; he conceded removability and applied for cancellation of removal.
An IJ initially denied relief on statutory grounds, that decision was vacated after the 2009 conviction was altered, and on remand the IJ granted cancellation, crediting Hernandez’s testimony and character evidence.
DHS appealed; the BIA reviewed de novo and reversed, concluding Hernandez was statutorily eligible but did not merit a favorable discretionary exercise because of his criminal history (focusing on the 2009 and 2016 incidents, his guilty plea, and protective orders).
Hernandez argued the BIA engaged in impermissible factfinding and overruled the IJ’s factual/credibility findings; the BIA denied reconsideration explaining it reweighed equities using facts found by the IJ.
The Second Circuit held the BIA reweighed the equities (not impermissibly factfound), treated the BIA’s language in context, and dismissed Hernandez’s petition for lack of jurisdiction to review the agency’s discretionary denial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the BIA impermissibly engaged in factfinding / overruled IJ credibility	BIA reversed IJ’s factual findings and credibility determination (impermissible).	BIA adhered to IJ findings and merely reweighed discretionary equities de novo.	Court: BIA reweighed equities based on IJ’s findings; did not impermissibly factfind; dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
Whether BIA mischaracterized phone-throwing as throwing “at” wife	That wording added a new factual finding contrary to IJ’s finding that phone didn’t hit wife.	BIA drew a permissible logical inference from testimony; any slip is minor/harmless.	Court: Inference reasonable; any minor misdescription was inconsequential.
Whether BIA wrongly labeled Hernandez’s conduct “harmful/violent/abusive”	Characterizations contradicted IJ’s credited explanation minimizing violence.	Descriptions are supported by admitted conduct (phone throw, guilty plea, protective order) and prior violent conviction.	Court: Record supports BIA characterization; within BIA’s discretion to weigh as adverse.
Whether BIA erred in assessing wife’s affidavit credibility	Wife’s affidavit effectively recanted prior police report, so BIA should have treated it differently.	Affidavit did not explicitly say she misrepresented her police report; BIA permissibly discounted its weight.	Court: BIA reasonably evaluated affidavit’s persuasive value; proper weighing of evidence.

Rodriguez v. Gonzales, 451 F.3d 60 (2d Cir. 2006) (cancellation of removal requires statutory eligibility and favorable discretionary exercise)
Argueta v. Holder, 617 F.3d 109 (2d Cir. 2010) (BIA balances positive and adverse equities; criminal record is adverse)
Barco-Sandoval v. Gonzales, 516 F.3d 35 (2d Cir. 2008) (limits on judicial review of discretionary denials)
Padmore v. Holder, 609 F.3d 62 (2d Cir. 2010) (BIA may not reverse IJ on disputed material facts without remand)
Noble v. Keisler, 505 F.3d 73 (2d Cir. 2007) (ambiguous BIA language read in context; agency explanation can clarify)
Wallace v. Gonzalez, 463 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2006) (BIA may recount IJ findings and still permissibly reweigh)
Xiao Ji Chen v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 471 F.3d 315 (2d Cir. 2006) (courts dismiss attempts to recast factual disputes as legal questions)
De La Rosa v. Holder, 598 F.3d 103 (2d Cir. 2010) (minor descriptive errors do not require remand where error is tangential)
Chen v. Bureau of Citizenship & Immigr. Servs., 470 F.3d 509 (2d Cir. 2006) (BIA must apply standard it cites; failure requires remand)
INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (2001) (discretionary relief is a matter of grace, not entitlement)
Alom v. Whitaker, 910 F.3d 708 (2d Cir. 2018) (BIA may weigh evidence differently than IJ when applying legal standards)
Hui Lin Huang v. Holder, 677 F.3d 130 (2d Cir. 2012) (weight of evidence lies largely with agency)