Jose Calderon-Monroy v. Eric Holder, Jr. , 443 F. App'x 306 ( 2011 )


Menu:
  •                                                                            FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                            JUL 18 2011
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                      U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    JOSE FRANCISCO CALDERON-                         No. 09-70667
    MONROY,
    Agency No. A098-120-256
    Petitioner,
    v.                                             MEMORANDUM *
    ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted July 12, 2011 **
    Before:        SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.
    Jose Francisco Calderon-Monroy, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
    petitions pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals
    (“BIA”), affirming the immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum,
    withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    (“CAT”). Our jurisdiction is governed by 
    8 U.S.C. § 1252
    . We review de novo
    questions of law, Cerezo v. Mukasey, 
    512 F.3d 1163
    , 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except
    to the extent that deference is owed to the BIA’s determination of the governing
    statutes and regulations, Simeonov v. Ashcroft, 
    371 F.3d 532
    , 535 (9th Cir. 2004).
    We review for substantial evidence factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 
    453 F.3d 1182
    , 1184-85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny the petition for review.
    We reject Calderon-Monroy’s claim that he is eligible for asylum based on
    his anti-gang political opinion and membership in a particular social group. See
    Barrios v. Holder, 
    581 F.3d 849
    , 854 (9th Cir. 2009) (refusal to join gangs does
    not constitute a political opinion or membership in a particular social group);
    Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 
    542 F.3d 738
    , 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008) (“young men in El
    Salvador resisting gang violence” does not constitute a particular social group).
    Accordingly, because Calderon-Monroy failed to establish that he was persecuted
    or fears persecution on account of a protected ground, his asylum and withholding
    of removal claims fail. See Barrios, 
    581 F.3d at 856
    .
    Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief, because
    Calderon-Monroy did not establish a likelihood of torture by, at the instigation of,
    or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadorean government. See
    Wakkary v. Holder, 
    558 F.3d 1049
    , 1067-68 (9th Cir. 2009).
    09-70667
    Finally, Calderon-Monroy’s due process claim fails because not only did he
    fail to raise this before the BIA, but the record also shows that he did, in fact,
    testify.
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    09-70667