Sara Josefina Altuve v. U.S. Attorney General

FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
JANUARY 28, 2010
JOHN LEY
ACTING CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 09-11916
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
Agency Nos. A099-983-157,
A099-983-158
SARA JOSEFINA ALTUVE,
LUIS EMIGDIO PRIMERA,
LUISIANA CAROLINA PRIMERA,
Petitioners,
versus
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
________________________
Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
_________________________
(January 28, 2010)
Before BARKETT, PRYOR and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

-- 1 of 3 --

Sara Josefina Altuve and her family, natives and citizens of Venezuela,
petition this Court for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals
that denied Altuve’s application for asylum and withholding of removal under the
Immigration and Nationality Act and relief under the United Nations Convention
Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or
Punishment. INA §§ 208, 241; 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158, 1231; 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c). The
Board denied the application based on a finding that Altuve and her husband, Luis
Emigdio Primera, were not credible. We deny the petition.
We review adverse credibility findings for substantial evidence. Chen v.
U.S. Att’y Gen., 463 F.3d 1228, 1230–31 (11th Cir. 2006). Adverse credibility
findings will be reversed “‘only if the evidence “compels” a reasonable fact finder
to find otherwise.’” Id. at 1231 (quoting Sepulveda v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 401 F.3d
1226, 1230 (11th Cir. 2005)). An adverse credibility determination may be based
on inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and falsehoods in the applicant’s oral and written
statements. 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii).
Substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility finding, see Al Najjar
v. Ashcroft, 257 F.3d 1262, 1283–84 (11th Cir. 2001), and the Board provided
specific and cogent reasons to support that finding, Chen, 463 F.3d at 1231.
Altuve and her husband presented inconsistent, uncorroborated, and implausible
testimonies about her alleged persecution in Venezuela. Altuve testified incredibly
2

-- 2 of 3 --

that she received death threats from the Bolivarian Circles because of her activities
with First Justice, an organization that opposed Hugo Chavez, even though she was
also employed by the Chavez government, allowed to transfer to a station closer to
her home, and stated in a letter of resignation that she was “grateful” to the agency
“for the cooperation given.” Altuve testified, on cross-examination, that members
of the Bolivarian Circles did not target her during an opposition demonstration in
April 2002, but Altuve’s husband insisted that members “recognized” and attacked
Altuve. Altuve and her husband also testified inconsistently about the number of
marches they attended. Altuve’s husband also testified that he saw Altuve receive
two threatening telephone calls at home, but he changed his story when confronted
with Altuve’s testimony that she had received the calls at work. Altuve failed to
provide any evidence to corroborate her story about being threatened by gunmen
on a public bus in December 2005, and her testimony that she obtained medical
treatment in March 2006 conflicted with her husband’s testimony that she received
immediate treatment. The record does not “‘compel’ a reasonable fact finder” to
credit the testimonies of Altuve and her husband. Chen, 463 F.3d at 1233.
Altuve’s petition for review is DENIED.
3

-- 3 of 3 --