DocketNumber： 13-72075, 13-74023
Judges： Kozinski, Fletcher, Gould
Filed Date： 5/13/2016
Status： Non-Precedential
Modified Date： 11/6/2024
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAY 13 2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JOSUE DANIEL LARA-SOTO, Nos. 13-72075 Nos. 13-74023 Petitioner, Agency No. A095-797-258 v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney MEMORANDUM* General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Argued and Submitted May 3, 2016 Pasadena, California Before: KOZINSKI, W. FLETCHER and GOULD, Circuit Judges. 1. Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Lara-Soto is unlikely to be persecuted if he returns to Guatemala. Pagayon v. Holder,675 F.3d 1182
, 1190 (9th Cir. 2011). Lara-Soto testified that the police apprehended and arrested individuals who tried to kill him. The record therefore does not compel * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. page 2 the conclusion that the government was “unable or unwilling to control private persecutors.” Afriyie v. Holder,613 F.3d 924
, 936 (9th Cir. 2010). And any proclaimed fear of persecution on the basis of family membership was undermined by Lara-Soto’s testimony that his parents and child live in Guatemala. Accordingly, Lara-Soto is not entitled to withholding of removal. 2. The BIA didn’t abuse its discretion by denying Lara-Soto’s motion to reopen and reconsider. Lara-Soto didn’t establish any error of law or fact based on the existing record that would justify reconsideration. Iturribarria v. INS,321 F.3d 889
, 895 (9th Cir. 2003). And the BIA properly declined to reopen proceedings because Lara-Soto didn’t show prejudice from his counsel’s failures to contact Lara-Soto’s cousin and provide evidence of Oscar Cabrera’s notoriety. See Singh v. Holder,658 F.3d 879
, 885 (9th Cir. 2011) (“When considering the merits of a motion to reopen premised on ineffective assistance of counsel, the BIA asks whether counsel’s performance was deficient, and whether the alien suffered prejudice.”). Lara-Soto’s cousin had told him that she wouldn’t testify on his behalf. And neither her testimony nor the proffered evidence about Cabrera would have shown that Lara-Soto would more likely than not suffer persecution. PETITION DENIED.