Pedro Matamoros Martinez v. Merrick Garland ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                               NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       MAY 13 2022
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    PEDRO MATAMOROS MARTINEZ,                       No.    21-70504
    Petitioner,                     Agency No. A028-579-973
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
    General,
    Respondent.
    On Petition for Review of an Order of the
    Board of Immigration Appeals
    Submitted May 11, 2022**
    Pasadena, California
    Before: WATFORD and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges, and HELLERSTEIN, ***
    District Judge.
    *
    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).
    ***
    The Honorable Alvin K. Hellerstein, United States District Judge for
    the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation.
    Page 2 of 3
    Petitioner Pedro Matamoros Martinez, a native and citizen of Nicaragua,
    petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)
    affirming the decision of an immigration judge (IJ) denying his applications for
    asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against
    Torture (CAT). We deny the petition.
    1. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Matamoros
    Martinez did not establish past persecution or a likelihood of future persecution on
    the basis of a protected ground. Matamoros Martinez credibly testified that, in
    1984, members of the Sandinista military came to his family home to recruit him,
    causing him to hide at an aunt’s house for three days. He stated that he feared
    joining the military because of his parents’ anti-Sandinista political views. The
    agency’s determination that this incident did not amount to persecution is
    supported by substantial evidence. See Duran-Rodriguez v. Barr, 
    918 F.3d 1025
    ,
    1028 (9th Cir. 2019).
    The record does not compel the conclusion that Matamoros Martinez faces a
    likelihood of future persecution if returned to Nicaragua. Matamoros Martinez
    testified that he fled Nicaragua in 1988. On cross-examination, he admitted that
    siblings who still live in Nicaragua no longer receive threats or otherwise have
    problems with the Sandinista government, which remains in power. His parents
    also lived in Nicaragua until their deaths without experiencing further problems.
    Page 3 of 3
    On this record, Matamoros Martinez’s fear that he might be singled out for
    persecution more than 30 years after the soldiers came to his home does not rise
    above mere speculation. Because he cannot establish a clear probability of
    persecution, we need not reach his arguments that the agency erred in finding that
    any such persecution lacked a nexus to his membership in a particular social group.
    2. For similar reasons, the agency’s denial of CAT protection is also
    supported by substantial evidence. Given that more than 30 years have passed
    since Matamoros Martinez left Nicaragua, no evidence in the record compels the
    conclusion that on return he is more likely than not to be identified by Sandinista
    authorities and subjected to treatment amounting to torture. See Mairena v. Barr,
    
    917 F.3d 1119
    , 1125–26 (9th Cir. 2019). Country conditions reports indicating
    widespread human rights abuses aimed at political opponents are not, on their own,
    sufficient to prove that Matamoros Martinez himself would face such treatment.
    
    Id. at 1126
    .
    PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-70504

Filed Date: 5/13/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 5/13/2022