Ruben Vera-Perez v. Merrick Garland

facts and circumstances,” as it was required to do. Id. at 20, 24.

Vera-Perez cites a case where the BIA was “hesitant to give substantial

weight” to an arrest report. In Re Arreguin de Rodriguez, 21 I. & N. Dec. 38,

(B.I.A. 1995). The facts of Arreguin de Rodriguez are distinguishable. The

petitioner had denied wrongdoing, and the conduct for which she was arrested

3 (giving a ride to a family near the border) was susceptible of an innocent

explanation. Id. Here, by contrast, Vera-Perez has not denied wrongdoing or

contested the facts in the arrest records. Nor is there an innocent explanation for

battering one’s spouse or causing an accident while driving drunk.

Similarly, two out-of-circuit cases that follow Arreguin de Rodriguez are

distinguishable because the petitioners credibly denied wrongdoing. Avila-Ramirez

v. Holder, 764 F.3d 717, 719 (7th Cir. 2014) (IJ found the petitioner “‘credible’

and gave ‘full weight to his testimony’”); Billeke-Tolosa v. Ashcroft, 385 F.3d 708,

709-10 (6th Cir. 2004) (court-appointed social worker evaluated the petitioner and

agreed he did not commit the acts described in the criminal complaints).

Because the IJ and BIA did…