HERNANDEZ URCINO v. WILKINSON (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-01-29No. No. 20-70616

Summary · law.co

Holding. The petition for review is denied.

Santiago Hernandez-Urcino, a Mexican citizen, sought judicial review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' dismissal of his appeal challenging an immigration judge's denial of his asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture relief applications. The court examined whether substantial evidence supported the agency's factual findings regarding Hernandez-Urcino's eligibility for these forms of protection.

The court determined that substantial evidence supported the agency's conclusion that Hernandez-Urcino did not establish he would face persecution based on a protected ground—such as membership in a particular social group. The opinion noted that even if such membership were established, an applicant must demonstrate the persecution would occur specifically because of that membership, not from general criminal activity or gang violence. Consequently, both his asylum and withholding of removal claims failed. Similarly, substantial evidence supported denial of Convention Against Torture relief because Hernandez-Urcino failed to demonstrate it was more likely than not that he would be tortured by the Mexican government or with its consent or acquiescence if returned.

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

Key issues

Whether persecution was motivated by a protected ground rather than random criminal activity
Whether applicant established nexus between claimed persecution and protected status
Whether applicant demonstrated likelihood of torture by or with government acquiescence

Procedural posture

The petitioner sought review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' dismissal of 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 **

Santiago Hernandez-Urcino, 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 substantial evidence the agencys factual findings. Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agencys determination that Hernandez-Urcino failed to establish he would be persecuted on account of a protected ground. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1097 (9th Cir. 2011) (even if membership in a particular social group is established, an applicant must still show that “persecution was or will be on account of his membership in such group”); Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an applicants “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus, Hernandez-Urcinos asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.

Substantial evidence also supports the agencys denial of CAT relief because Hernandez-Lopez 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 Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.