RIVERA ROJAS v. GARLAND (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-03-19No. No. 17-71104

Summary · law.co

Holding. The petition for review was denied. The court affirmed the Board's dismissal, concluding that the agency did not abuse its discretion in determining the conviction was a particularly serious crime and that substantial evidence supported the denial of Convention Against Torture relief.

Roberto Carlos Rivera-Rojas, a Mexican citizen, challenged the Board of Immigration Appeals' dismissal of his asylum claim. The immigration judge had denied his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. On review, the court examined whether the agency properly determined that Rivera-Rojas' California Penal Code conviction constituted a particularly serious crime barring him from asylum eligibility, and whether substantial evidence supported the denial of torture-based relief.

The court found no abuse of discretion in the agency's conclusion that the conviction was a particularly serious crime. The agency had applied the correct legal factors in its case-specific analysis. Additionally, the court determined that sufficient evidence supported the denial of Convention Against Torture relief because Rivera-Rojas failed to demonstrate that he would more likely than not face torture by the Mexican government or with its consent if returned.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Whether a California Penal Code Section 243.4(b) conviction qualifies as a particularly serious crime barring asylum eligibility
Standard of review for agency discretionary determinations in immigration cases
Whether applicant established likelihood of torture by Mexican government upon return

Procedural posture

The petitioner sought judicial review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture relief.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

MEMORANDUM **

Roberto Carlos Rivera-Rojas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judges decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the agencys particularly serious crime determination. Avendano-Hernandez v. Lynch, 800 F.3d 1072, 1077 (9th Cir. 2015). We review for substantial evidence the agencys factual findings. Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in determining that Rivera-Rojas’ conviction under California Penal Code Section 243.4(b) was a particularly serious crime that barred him from eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal, where it considered the appropriate factors to weigh the seriousness of the crime in a case-specific inquiry. See Avendano-Hernandez, 800 F.3d at 1077 (explaining that review is limited to ensuring that the agency relied on the “appropriate factors and proper evidence” and that the court may not reweigh the evidence (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)).

Substantial evidence supports the agencys denial of CAT relief because Rivera-Rojas failed to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See Mairena v. Barr, 917 F.3d 1119, 1125-26 (9th Cir. 2019).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.