Wilmer Marroquin-Retana v. Attorney General United States
675 F. App'x 216
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- Marroquin, a Salvadoran national, entered the U.S. without inspection in 2013, expressed fear of return, and passed a credible fear interview; DHS charged him as removable.
- He applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief; an IJ found him not credible, denied relief, and ordered removal.
- The BIA affirmed the asylum denial as untimely, upheld the adverse credibility finding, and alternatively found a "serious nonpolitical crime" bar based on an Interpol notice and Salvadoran appellate conviction for attempted manslaughter.
- The BIA and IJ separately discussed Marroquin’s testimony about MS-13 attacks, disappearance of relatives, and claims that the victim was a corrupt police officer; both discounted and found inconsistencies/omissions.
- The court limited its review to withholding and CAT claims (lacks jurisdiction over asylum timeliness) and evaluated the agency’s findings for substantial evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to review asylum-timeliness | Marroquin sought review of entire denial | Gov’t: timeliness is committed to agency; court lacks jurisdiction under §1158(a)(3) | Court: lacks jurisdiction to review timeliness (claim not reviewable) |
| Adverse credibility and withholding of removal | Marroquin contends IJ/BIA failed to consider his testimony and evidence; credibility errors under REAL ID Act | Gov’t: testimony contained material omissions/inconsistencies; IJ/BIA properly applied REAL ID Act standard | Court: substantial evidence supports adverse credibility; Marroquin waived other challenges by not briefing them |
| Serious nonpolitical crime bar to withholding | Marroquin disputes sufficiency/validity of Salvadoran conviction and claims corrupt police involvement | Gov’t: submitted Interpol notice, conviction record, sentencing/order and police letters showing appellate conviction for attempted manslaughter | Court: evidence met "serious reasons to believe" (probable cause) standard; bar applies; alternative ground supports denial |
| CAT claim (torture likelihood) | Marroquin argues he likely would be tortured by gangs, corrupt officials, or police; documentary evidence and testimony suffice | Gov’t: testimonial evidence was discredited; independent evidence fails to show likelihood of torture | Court: substantial evidence supports denial—testimony discounted; independent documentary evidence insufficient to show torture more likely than not |
Key Cases Cited
- Sandie v. Att'y Gen., 562 F.3d 246 (3d Cir.) (reviewing BIA and IJ decisions together)
- Balasubramanrim v. I.N.S., 143 F.3d 157 (3d Cir.) (substantial-evidence review standard)
- Higgs v. Att'y Gen., 655 F.3d 333 (3d Cir.) (pro se immigration petitioner claims construed broadly)
- Guo Qi Wang v. Holder, 583 F.3d 86 (2d Cir.) ("serious reasons to believe" ~ probable cause)
- Go v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir.) (same interpretation of serious-nonpolitical-crime standard)
- Djadjou v. Holder, 662 F.3d 265 (4th Cir.) (agency must consider independent corroborating evidence for CAT claims)
- Sevoian v. Ashcroft, 290 F.3d 166 (3d Cir.) ("more likely than not" standard for CAT relief)