### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 60772 Summary Calendar

OLIMPIA GARCIA MIRANDA, also known as Esmeralda Garcia Miranda ,
Petitioner

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL , Respondent

Cons . w/No. 18

- 60774

LESLY EUGENIA BARRIOS

- GARCIA,

Petitioner

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent

Cons

. w /No. 18

- 60775

JOSE CARLOS BARRIOS

- GARCIA,

Petitioner

v. WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 10, 2020 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-60772 Document: 00515448280 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2020No. 18

- 60772 c/w No. 18

- 60774 c/w No. 18

- 6077 5

2 Petition s for Review of Order s of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A206 179 655 BIA No. A202 004 09 9 BIA No. A202 004 100

Before SMITH, DENNIS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Olimpia Garcia Miranda and her two minor children, Lesly Eugenia
Barrios

- Garcia and Jose Carlos Barrios

- Garcia, are natives and citizens of
Guatemala. 1 They applied for, inter alia, protection under the Convention Against Torture ( CAT ) based on Garcia Miranda’s fear of gang violence. The argument for relief is that unreported threats received from unidentified gangsters suffice to show entitlement to CAT relief in light of widespread
violence in Guatemala. The Immigration Judge (IJ) denied their requests for relief, and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed their appeal. Garcia Miranda timely petitioned for review in this court. When prese nted with a petition for review, we examine the propriety of the BIA’s decision and consider the IJ’s decision only insofar as the latter
influenced the former. Shaikh v. Holder , 588 F.3d 861, 863 (5th Cir. 2009). Because the BIA agreed with the IJ’s con clusions, we review both decisions.
Id

.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4.

1 The children’s claims are derivative of their mother’s claim

. Case: 18-60772 Document: 00515448280 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/10/2020No. 18

- 60772 c/w No. 18

- 60774 c/w No. 18

- 6077 5

3 To receive CAT relief, one must show “that it is more likely than not that he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(c)(2); see Efe v. Ashcroft , 293 F.3d 899, 9 07 (5th Cir. 2002 ). For these purposes, torture is defined as the intentional infliction of physical or mental suffering with the acquiescence of a public official. 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18(a)(1); see Iruegas

- Valdez v. Yates , 846 F.3d 806, 812 (5th Cir. 2017). The conclusion that an alien is ineligible for CAT relief is a factual finding reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. Chen v. Gonzales , 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006). To meet this standard, the petitioner must
show that the evidence i s so compelling that a finding contrary to that of the BIA is demanded, not just supported. Orellana

- Monson v. Holder , 685 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012); see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B). Garcia Miranda has not shown that officials acquiesced in the threats of which she complains. See Garcia v. Holder , 756 F.3d 885, 892 (5th Cir. 2014). Accordingly, she has not shown that the evidence demand s a conclusion contrary to that of the BIA on
th e issue whether she should receive CAT relief

. See Iruegas

- Valdez , 846 F.3d at 812; Orellana

- Monson , 685 F.3d at 518. The petition for review is DENIED. Case: 18-60772 Document: 00515448280 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/10/2020