LAW.coLAW.co

GARCIA LORENZO v. WILKINSON (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-01-27No. No. 19-71491

Summary

Holding. The petition for review was denied, affirming the immigration judge's determination that Garcia Lorenzo failed to establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Mexico.

Yuridia Garcia Lorenzo, a Mexican citizen, challenged an immigration judge's decision that she lacked a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Mexico and therefore could not obtain relief from her reinstated removal order. The court reviewed whether sufficient evidence supported the immigration judge's findings under the standard requiring substantial evidence. The court found that Garcia Lorenzo did not establish either a reasonable possibility of persecution based on a protected ground or a reasonable possibility of torture by the Mexican government or with its acquiescence, and therefore affirmed the immigration judge's determination.

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

Key issues

  • Whether applicant established reasonable fear of persecution on account of a protected ground
  • Whether applicant demonstrated reasonable possibility of torture by or with government acquiescence
  • Standard of review for immigration judge's negative reasonable fear determination

Procedural posture

Garcia Lorenzo petitioned for review of an immigration judge's decision denying her relief from a reinstated removal order based on a finding that she lacked reasonable fear of persecution or torture.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Yuridia Garcia Lorenzo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an immigration judges (“IJ”) determination under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.31(a) that she did not have a reasonable fear of persecution or torture in Mexico and thus is not entitled to relief from her reinstated removal order. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review an IJs negative reasonable fear determination for substantial evidence. Andrade-Garcia v. Lynch, 828 F.3d 829, 833 (9th Cir. 2016). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJs determination that Garcia Lorenzo failed to establish a reasonable possibility of persecution in Mexico on account of a protected ground. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (an applicant “must provide some evidence of [motive], direct or circumstantial”); 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”); Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (concluding future fear not objectively reasonable under circumstances of the case).

Substantial evidence also supports the IJs determination that Garcia Lorenzo failed to demonstrate a reasonable possibility of torture by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See Andrade-Garcia, 828 F.3d at 836-37 (no government acquiescence demonstrated).

As stated in the courts August 6, 2019 order, the temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.