FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT Febr uar y 11, 2008 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 12602 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ B I A N o. A 96- 290- 188 L U C A S C A L L E , P e titio n e r , v ersu s U .S . A T T O RN E Y G E N E R A L , R e s p o n d e n t.

________________________ P e t i t i on f orR e vi e w of

aD e c i s i on of

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls

_________________________ ( F e b r u ar y 11, 2008) B efo re C A RN E S , B A R K E T T an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

L ucas M ar i ano C al l e, a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f A rgent i na, pet i t i on s thi s C ou rt f o rr e v ie w o f

th e d e c is io n o f

th e B o a r d o f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls th a t d e n ie d h is appl i ca t i on for w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al un der the Im m i grat i on and N at i on al i ty A ct a nd the U ni t e d N a t i ons C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e and O the rC rue l , I nhum a n, or D egra di ng T re atm entor P un i shm ent(the “ C on vent i on ”) . T he B oard foun d that C al l e f ai l ed t o p rove thathe suff er ed “ pastpers ec ut i on ” or aprob abi l i ty of f uture pe r s e c ut i on a nd C a l l e f

a i l e d t o pr ove tha the w a s “ m or e l i ke l ytha n not ” t o be to rtu r e d b yo rw ith th e “a c q u ie s c e n c e ” o f ag o v e rn m e n t o f

f ic ia l u p o n h is r e tu rn to A r ge nt i na . W e de nyC a l l e ’ s pe t i t i on. I . B AC KG RO UN D C a l l e e nt e r e d the U ni t e d S t a t e s on A ugus t17, 1999, a nd r e m a i ne d i n the coun try , w i tho utautho ri za t i on , un t i l 20 00 . O n D ec em ber 18, 20 01 , he re ent er ed the U ni t e d S t a t e s a s avi ol a t orof the V i s aW a i ve rP r ogr a m . I n F e brua ry2003, he f i l e d a n appl i c a t i on f

ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , a nd r e l i e f

unde rthe C on vent i on . H e s ou gh tre l i ef base d o n h i s pol i t i ca l op i ni on and h i s a l l eged m i stre atm entby “ del i nq uent s” i n A rgent i na. T he Im m i grat i on Judg e hel d a heari ng on C al l e’ s app l i ca t i on . C al l e t es t i fi ed tha the s oughta s y l um i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s be c aus e he w a s ahom os e xua l a nd d is c r im in a te d a g a in s t b y“p e o p le o n th e s tr e e t.” C a lle r e c o u n te d tw o in c id e n ts in A rgent i na re l at ed t o h i s s exual ori ent at i on thatoccurre d abo ut14 and 1 1 years3

b e f o r e th e h e a r i n g . W h e n Ca l l e w a s 1 6 y e a r s o l d , ap o l i c e o f f i c e re n t e r e d h i s h o me u n d e rth e p r e te n s e o f

u s in g th e b a th r o o m a n d in s te a d h a d s e x w ith C a lle . C a lle alleg ed th at h e d idn o t w an t t o h av e s ex , b u t w as in fe ard u e to th e o ff icer ’s pos i t i on of

author i ty . W he n C a l l e w a s 19 y e a r s ol d, hi s m ot or c y c l e w a s s t ol e n a nd he r e port e d the c r i m e t o the pol i c e . T he pol i c e a l l e ge dl yr e f us e d a s s i s t a nc e a nd m ent i on ed that , i f they di sc ov er ed the m ot orcy cl e, they w ou l d sel l i tand ret ai n p art o f th e p r o c e e d s . C a lle a d m itte d th a t h e d idn o t s u f f e ra n yf u rth e rm is tr e a tm e n t in A rgent i na. C a l l e , w ho i s H I V pos i t i ve , e xpr e s s e d c onc e rn w i th the m e di c a l tr e a tm e nt a v a i l ab l e i n Ar g e n t i n aa f t e rh a v i n g r e c e i v e d f

r e e tr e a tm e n ti n th e Un i t e d S t a t e s . He te s tif ie d th a t th e h o s p ita ls in A r g e n tin ad idn o t h a v e h is m e d ic a tio n a n d th a t h is p a rtn e rd ie d th e y e a rb e f o r e th e h e a r in g d u e to la c ko f tr e a tm e n t. A lth o u g h C a lle s ubm i tt e d va r i ous doc um e nt s r e l a t e d t o hum a n r i ght s pr a c t i c e s i n A r ge nt i na , he a dm i tt e d tha the di d notha ve a nye vi de nc e tha the w oul d be unabl e t o r e c e i ve tre atm entfor hi s c on di t i on i n A rgent i na. C al l e a dm i tt ed thathe w as abl e t o l ea ve A rgent i na w hen h e bec am e 21 years o l d i n 1 9 9 7 , b u th e ch o se n o tt o l eav e d esp i t e h i s al l eg ed m i streatm en tas a ho m osexual . W hen q uest i on ed w hy he di d n otm ov e t o B ueno s A i re s, a c i ty t ou t ed a s be i ng “ ga yf

r i e ndl y , ” he s t a t e d tha the vi s i t e d the c i tyw he n he w a s 17 or184

y e a r s o ld a n d f

e a r e d th e “b ig c ity ” a tm o s p h e r e , a lth o u g h h e c o m f o rtab lyr e s id e d in M i a m i a f t e rhe r e turne d t o the U ni t e d S t a t e s i n 2001. T he Im m i grat i on Judg e f ou nd thatC al l e’ s app l i ca t i on for a sy l um w as un t i m el y and deni ed C al l e’ s app l i ca t i on for w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al and rel i ef unde rthe C onve nt i on. A l though he f ound C a l l e ’ s a l l e ga t i ons c r e di bl e , the j udge ru le d th a t C a lle f

a ile d to e s tab lis h th a t h e w o u ldb e p e r s e c u te d o n th e b a s is o f h is hom os e xua l i tyortha the ha d be e n orw oul d be t ortur e d byorw i th the a c qui e s c e nc e of

agove rnm e ntof

f i c i a l , pa rt i c ul a r l yw he n the A r ge nt i ne c ons t i tut i on proh i bi t ed such cond uct . T he j ud ge foun d thatC al l e had no tes t abl i shed that s ui t abl e m e di c a l tr e a tm e ntw oul d notbe a va i l abl e i n A r ge nt i na . R e l y i ng on d o cu m en t ary ev i d en ce, th e j u d g e co n cl u d ed th atsev eral p art s o f A rg en t i n a, m o st n o tab lyB u e n o s A ir e s , f o s te r e d ah o m o s e x u a l lif e s ty le a n d C a lle c o u ldr e lo c a te to B ue nos A i r e s a nd c ont i nue hi s w ork a s aha i rs ty l i s t . O ne ne w s r e porti n 2003 s ta te d th a t s e v e r a l c itie s w e r e c o n s id e r in g c iv il u n io n la w s to e x te n d m a r ita l r ig h ts to g a yc o u p le s f

o rin h e r ita n c e , a s w e ll a s p r o f e s s io n a l b e n e f

its . T h e B o a r d “a g r e e [ d ] w ith th e I m m ig r a tio n J u d g e ’s c o n c lu s io n ” th a t C a lle

“ ha d notm e thi s bur de n of e s t abl i s hi ng ‘ pa s tpe r s e c ut i on’ orac l e a rpr obabi l i tyof pe r s e c ut i on i f

r e turne d t o A r ge nt i na . ” T he B oa r d a l s o “ a f f i rm [ e d] the I m m i gr a t i on J u d g e ’s d e te rm in a tio n ” th a t C a lle “f a ile d to d e m o n s tr a te th a t h e [ w a s ] ‘m o r e lik e ly5

tha n not ’ t o be t ortur e d i n A r ge nt i nabyorw i th the ‘ a c qui e s c e nc e ’ of agove rnm e nt o f f ic ia l.” I I . STA N D A R D O F R EVI EW W e r evi ew the deci si on of the B oard t o d et erm i ne w hether i ti s “ supp ort ed b y reaso n ab l e, su b st an t i al , an d p ro b at i v e ev i d en ce o n th e reco rd co n si d ered as a w hol e . ” A l N a

jj a rv. A s hc r of

t , 257 F . 3d 1262, 1284 ( 11th C i r . 2001) ( quot i ng L or i s m e v. I . N . S . , 129 F . 3d 1441, 1444–45 ( 11th C i r . 1997) ) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a rks om i tt e d) . “ T o r e ve r s e [ thos e ] f a c tf i ndi ngs , w e m us tf

i nd tha tthe r e c or d not onl ys upport s r e ve r s a l , butc om pe l s i t . ” M e ndoz av. U . S . A tt ’ yG e n. , 327 F . 3d 1283, 1287 ( 11th C i r . 2003) . W e r e vi e w the l e ga l c onc l us i ons of the B oa r d de novo. I d. a t1287 n. 6. W he n the B oa r d a dopt s the f i ndi ngs of

the I m m i gr a t i on Judg e, w e r evi ew the deci si on of the Im m i grat i on Judg e. A l N ajj ar , 25 7 F . 3d at 1284. I I I . DI S CUS S I ON C al l e c hal l enges tw o o f the three deci si on s of the B oard. C al l e c hal l enges the fi nd i ng s by the B oard regar di ng C al l e’ s app l i ca t i on for w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al a n d r e lie f

u n d e rth e C o n v e n tio n . C a lle d o e s n o t c h a lle n g e th e f in d in g th a t h is ap p lic a tio n f

o ra s y lu m w a s u n tim e ly , w h ic h w e la c kju r is d ic tio n to r e v ie w . M e ndoz a , 327 F . 3d a t1287.6

C a lle ’s b u r d e n is w e ll- e s tab lis h e d . T o q u a lif yf o rw ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l, a n a l i e n m us tpr ove tha t“ hi s l i f e orf r e e dom w oul d be thr e a t e ne d on a c c ountof ra ce , re l i gi on , nat i on al i ty, m em bers hi p i n a part i cul arsoci al grou p, or po l i t i ca l op i ni on . ” M endo za , 32 7 F . 3d at12 87 (c i t i ng 8 U . S . C . § 1 23 1(b)(3)(A )) . T he al i en m u s t e s tab lis h th a t “h e m o r e - lik e ly - th a n - n o t w o u ldb e p e r s e c u te d . . . u p o n h is r e turn t o the c ountryi n que s t i on. ” I d. ( c i t i ng F a hi m v. U . S . A tt ’ yG e n. , 278 F . 3d 1 2 1 6 , 1 2 1 8 (1 1 th C i r. 2 0 0 2 )). A n ap p l i can tfo r rel i ef u n d er th e C o n v en t i o n m u st

“ es t abl i sh thati ti s m ore l i kel y than n otthathe or she w ou l d b e t ortured i f r em ov ed t o the pr opos e d c ountryof r e m ova l . ” A l N a

jj a r , 257 F . 3d a t1303 ( quot i ng 8 C .F .R . § 2 0 8 .1 6 ( c ) ( 2 ) ( 2 0 0 1 ) ) ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s o m itte d ) . T o rtu r e is c onf i ne d t o thos e a c t s i nf

l i c t i ng “ s e ve r e pa i n a nd s uf f e r i ng, w he the rphy s i c a l or m e nt a l ” c om m i tt e d a tthe ha nds , unde rthe di r e c t i on, orw i th the a c qui e s c e nc e of “ap u b lic o f

f ic ia l o ro th e rp e r s o n a c tin g in a n o f f ic ia l c ap a c ity .” 8 C .F .R . § 20 8. 18 (a )( 1) (200 1). T he ac t s m ustbe “ i nt ent i on al l y i nfl i ct ed” e i ther t o extra ct

“ i nf orm a t i on orac onf

e s s i on, ” t o puni s h, i nt i m i da t e , orc oe r c e , or“ f ora nyr e a s on b a s e d o n d is c r im in a tio n o f a n yk in d [ .]” I d . S u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e s u p p o rts th e c o n c lu s io n th a t C a lle w a s n o t e n title d to w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al . A cc ordi ng t o C al l e, the no ncon se nsual se x w i th the po l i ce of f i c e ra nd the r e s pons e t o the the f tof hi s m ot or c y c l e w e r e i s ol a t e d i nc i de nt s , a nd no evi dence s ug gest s thatthese occurre nces w er e i nt ended as pers ec ut ory. S ee7

S epul veda v. U . S . A tt ’ y G en. , 40 1 F . 3d 12 26 , 12 31 (11th C i r. 20 05 ) ( “ [M ] er e ha r a s s m e ntdoe s nota m ountt o pe r s e c ut i on. ” P e r s e c ut i on r e qui r e s “ m or e tha n a f e w i s ol a t e d i nc i de nt s of ve rba l ha r a s s m e ntori nt i m i da t i on. ” ) ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m arks om i tt ed). C al l e a l so di d n otprov e thathe w ou l d b e unabl e t o o bt ai n m edi ca l tr e a tm e n tf

o rHI V. S ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e a l s o s upport s the f i ndi ng tha tC a l l e w i l l notl i ke l ybe to rtu r e d if

r e m o v e d . C a lle d id n o t p r o v e th a t h e w o u lde x p e r ie n c e a n y“s e v e r e p a in ors uf f e r i ng” upon hi s r e turn t o A r ge nt i na . T he r e c or d i ns t e a d s upport s the f i ndi ng thatA rgent i na w ou l d sup po rtC al l e’ s l i fe styl e. I I I . CONCL US I ON C al l e’ s p et i t i o n fo r rev i ew i s D EN I ED . P E T I T I ON DE NI E D.