USCA11 Case: 21-14388 Date Filed: 11/21/2022 Page: 1 of 5 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-14388 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ BRAULIO PEGUEROS MAGANA, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A208-549-355 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 21-14388 Date Filed: 11/21/2022 Page: 2 of 5 2 Opinion of the Court 21-14388 Before JILL PRYOR, BRANCH, and TJOFLAT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Braulio Pegueros Magana seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) final order affirming the Immigra- tion Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum as untimely. Before the IJ, Pegueros Magana argued that the changed circum- stances exception to the one-year filing deadline applied because his prior attorneys had erroneously advised him that he would not qualify for asylum unless a close family member had been killed, and after his brother was killed by the same cartel that had kidnapped and threatened him, he promptly applied for asylum. The IJ rejected this argument, noting that he had not been repre- sented by counsel until after the one-year deadline passed; he had not filed a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel against his prior attorneys; the death of his brother, without more, did not qualify as a changed circumstance; and that the evidence he pre- sented did not establish that his brother’s killing was plausibly re- lated to Pegueros Magana’s own threats and kidnapping. Before the BIA, Pegueros Magana argued that the IJ erred in finding his asylum claim was not timely under the changed cir- cumstances exception, that the IJ was wrong that the evidence did not link his brother’s death to his own claim of persecution, that the IJ’s finding placed “an insurmountable burden” on him to “show unequivocally” that all the events of persecution were re- lated, and that after he learned of his brother’s murder, he “had USCA11 Case: 21-14388 Date Filed: 11/21/2022 Page: 3 of 5 21-14388 Opinion of the Court 3 every right to feel that things had changed” and that despite his prior attorneys’ advice, he should seek asylum relief in the United States. The BIA affirmed the IJ’s finding for the same reasons the IJ stated, and noted that Pegueros Magana had not shown that his brother’s death was related to his claim. Pegueros Magana peti- tioned us for review, and now argues that the BIA and IJ commit- ted a legal error when they determined that the changed circum- stances exception did not apply because they did not consider his testimony that he received erroneous advice from his attorney because Pegueros Magana had not filed an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. We review the decision of the BIA as the final agency deci- sion, and we also review the decision of the IJ to the extent the BIA expressly adopted or explicitly agreed with it. Ayala v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 605 F.3d 941, 947–48 (11th Cir. 2010). We …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals