Chavira-Munoz v. Garland
Decision Date | 21 September 2022 |
Docket Number | 18-71859,18-73439 |
Parties | JUAN RAMON CHAVIRA-MUNOZ, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
JUAN RAMON CHAVIRA-MUNOZ, Petitioner,
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.
Nos. 18-71859, 18-73439
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
September 21, 2022
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Argued and Submitted September 1, 2022 San Francisco, California
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, Agency No. A206-263-191
Before: W. FLETCHER, BYBEE, and VANDYKE, Circuit Judges.
MEMORANDUM [*]
Juan Ramon Chavira-Munoz petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") order denying his application for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). In the alternative, he asks that we remand his case to the immigration judge ("IJ") to consider his claim
for cancellation of removal. We grant Chavira-Munoz's request for remand to the BIA and deny his other claims.
We review withholding of removal and CAT claims for substantial evidence. Wang v. Sessions, 861 F.3d 1003, 1007 (9th Cir. 2017). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252.
1. To be eligible for withholding of removal, a noncitizen must show that removal would send him to a country in which his "life or freedom would be threatened . . . because of [his] race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion." 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A). Chavira-Munoz claims that, if he returns to his home country of Mexico, he will be targeted by his brother and his brother's gang because of his family membership. Aside from his father, none of Chavira-Munoz's family members appear to have been subjected to gang violence. Thus, the record supports a finding that the alleged prejudice would be a result of private violence and vendettas rather than animus against Chavira-Munoz's family. See 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."). We therefore deny Chavira-Munoz's petition for withholding of removal.
2. "To qualify for CAT relief, a petitioner must establish that 'it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.'" Cole v. Holder, 659 F.3d 762, 770 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2)). For acts to qualify as torture, the government of the country of deportation must be "aware of the alleged torture but either willfully blind to it or unwilling to oppose it." Kaur v. Garland, 2 F.4th 823, 837 (9th Cir. 2021) (internal quotation marks and alterations omitted). Even assuming Chavira-Munoz has received credible threats to his life, no evidence...
To continue reading
Request your trial