Unpub. CA5 Remand: Reyes-Hoyes v. Garland

Reyes-Hoyes v. Garland

"Darlin Maribel Reyes-Hoyes (“Reyes-Hoyes”) and her minor child Antony Josue Hernandez-Reyes (“Antony”) petitioned this court to review the denial of their applications for asylum. For the following reasons, the petition for review is GRANTED in part and DISMISSED in part. The decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED to the BIA for further proceedings. ... While we agree with Reyes-Hoyes on the issue of past persecution if she is credible, we must vacate and remand for a determination of credibility, which the BIA failed to assess. Further, we vacate the BIA’s decision on the internal relocation and state action issues, as the BIA failed to meaningfully consider relevant evidence. ... [T]he evidence compels a conclusion that the harm suffered by Reyes-Hoyes was so severe as to constitute persecution. ... In sum, we conclude that, if Reyes-Hoyes is credible, the record compels the conclusion that Reyes-Hoyes suffered harm rising to the level of past persecution, but we remand for the BIA to consider her credibility in the first instance. We also conclude that the record compels the conclusion that safe internal relocation to parts of Guatemala—Mesata and Raul—was not possible. Additionally, we hold that the BIA procedurally erred in the remainder of its analysis concerning whether internal location was reasonable and whether Reyes-Hoyes had shown state action by not meaningfully considering the relevant substantial evidence. Finally, we lack jurisdiction over the remaining portions of Reyes-Hoyes’s petition. Accordingly, the petition for review is GRANTED in part and DISMISSED in part; the decision of the BIA is VACATED; and the case is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."

[Hats off to John M. Bray and Yadira Juarez!  PWS says: "Wow! This is an EOIR/OIL error fest — replete with misrepresentations and mischaracterizations! Totally sloppy work! Why won’t they publish this? It’s a perfect example of how Garland has failed to get the job done!"  Jeff Chase says: "24 pages; very detailed analysis of recurring asylum issues. Should certainly have been published. BTW, please note footnote 9, an example of the ongoing problem with the government’s online regs continuing to list the enjoined “death to asylum” regs that the previous administration tried to push through. The Fifth Circuit continues to believe that the internal relocation reg was amended effective January 19, 2021. Have cases been decided based on this erroneous belief?"]