GIRON CASTRO v. BARR (2020)

MEMORANDUM **

Christian Alonzo Giron-Castro, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's (“IJ”) decision denying his application for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Giron-Castro's contentions regarding political opinion and asylum because he did not raise them before the agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677–78 (9th Cir. 2004). We reject Giron-Castro's challenge to the BIA's streamlining procedures because the BIA's final order was not a streamlined decision.

Substantial evidence supports the agency's conclusion that Giron-Castro failed to establish that he would be persecuted on account of a protected ground. See Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184–85 (9th Cir. 2006) (reviewing for substantial evidence); Reyes v. Lynch, 842 F.3d 1125, 1131 (9th Cir. 2016) (to demonstrate social group membership, “[t]he applicant must ‘establish that the group is (1) composed of members who share a common immutable characteristic, (2) defined with particularity, and (3) socially distinct within the society in question’ ” (quoting Matter of M-E-V-G-, 26 I. & N. Dec. 227, 237 (BIA 2014))); see also Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“An alien's 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, Giron-Castro's withholding claim fails.

Substantial evidence supports the agency's denial of CAT protection because Giron-Castro failed to show he will more likely than not be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to El Salvador. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

PETITION DISMISSED in part and DENIED in part.