Quintero Gonzalez-Arlozonan v. Loretta E. Lynch , 649 F. App'x 474 ( 2016 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS APR 29 2016
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
QUINTERO GONZALEZ-ARLOZONAN, No. 15-70455
Petitioner, Agency No. A070-146-430
v.
MEMORANDUM*
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted April 26, 2016**
Before: McKEOWN, WARDLAW, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
Quintero Gonzalez-Arlozonan, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for relief 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 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).
§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, Zheng
v. Ashcroft, 332 F.3d 1186, 1193 (9th Cir. 2003), and deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Gonzalez-Arlozonan
failed to establish that it is more likely than not he would be tortured in Mexico by
or at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of, a public official or
other person acting in an official capacity. See Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d
1026, 1034 (9th Cir. 2013) (“Evidence that the police were aware of a particular
crime, but failed to bring the perpetrators to justice, is not in itself sufficient to
establish acquiescence in the crime.”). We reject Gonzalez-Arlozonan’s
contention that the BIA misinterpreted or ignored his testimony. Thus, Gonzalez-
Arlozonan’s CAT claim fails. See id. at 1035.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
2 15-70455