Elvis Sanchez Galindo v. Merrick Garland ( 2022 )

FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
APR 7 2022
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ELVIS ALEXANDER SANCHEZ No. 16-71006
GALINDO, AKA Elvis Galindo, AKA
Elvis Sanchez, AKA Elvis Alexander Agency No. A205-720-056
Sanchez,
Petitioner, MEMORANDUM*
v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 5, 2022**
Pasadena, California
Before: SCHROEDER, S.R. THOMAS, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
Elvis Alexander Sanchez Galindo, a citizen of Guatemala, petitions for
review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to affirm the
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of withholding of removal and protection under the
Convention Against Torture (CAT). We review for substantial evidence the
agency’s denial of withholding of removal and CAT relief. Duran-Rodriguez v.
Barr, 918 F.3d 1025, 1028 (9th Cir. 2019).
To qualify for withholding of removal, Sanchez Galindo has to show that he
experienced or will experience persecution inflicted either by the government or by
an organization that the government is unable or unwilling to control. See
Ornelas-Chavez v. Gonzales, 458 F.3d 1052, 1056 (9th Cir. 2006). To receive
protection under CAT, Sanchez Galindo has to prove that it is more likely than not
that he would be tortured upon his return to Guatemala by or with the acquiescence
of a public official. See id. at 1059.
Sanchez Galindo testified extensively at his immigration hearing, however,
that authorities in Guatemala successfully investigated, prosecuted, and imprisoned
the criminals who were targeting him. In light of the police’s extensive
involvement in protecting Sanchez Galindo from harm, the IJ correctly concluded,
and the BIA properly affirmed, that Sanchez Galindo does not qualify for
withholding of removal or protection under CAT.
The petition is DENIED.
2