Sergio Jacobo v. Loretta E. Lynch ( 2016 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 24 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
SERGIO JACOBO, No. 14-73232
Petitioner, Agency No. A206-407-614
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 16, 2016**
Before: O’SCANNLAIN, LEAVY, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.
Sergio Jacobo, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the
Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for deferral of removal under
the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.
*
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).
§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, Garcia-
Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2014), and review de novo due
process claims, Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1011 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny
the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Jacobo failed to
establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or
acquiesce of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity if
returned to Mexico. See Garcia-Milian, 755 F.3d 1026, 1034 (9th Cir. 2014) (“[a]
government does not acquiesce in the torture of its citizens merely because it is
aware of torture but powerless to stop it”) (internal quotation and citation omitted).
Thus, we reject Jacobo’s contention that the BIA’s denial of his CAT claim
violated his due process rights. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir.
2000) (requiring error to prevail on a due process claim).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 14-73232