Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Jonatan Gabriel FERNANDEZ-CATALAN, aka Francisco Rivera-Mendez, Petitioner, v. Merrick B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM **
Jonatan Gabriel Fernandez-Catalan, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency's factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.
We lack jurisdiction to consider the newly argued contentions in Fernandez-Catalan's brief regarding asylum and withholding of removal because he did not raise them before the agency. Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004).
We exercise our discretion to review the agency's conclusion that Fernandez-Catalan failed to establish that he would be persecuted on account of a protected ground, notwithstanding his failure to brief the issue adequately. Alcaraz v. INS, 384 F.3d 1150, 1161 (9th Cir. 2004). Substantial evidence supports the agency's conclusion. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (“[A]n applicant'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, Fernandez-Catalan's asylum and withholding of removal claims fail.
Substantial evidence supports the agency's denial of CAT protection because Fernandez-Catalan failed to show that it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Guatemala. Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).
The temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the mandate.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 15-70634
Decided: June 28, 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)