United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 22-60003

Summary Calendar

Liduvina Concepcion Carcamo-Moya, 

Petitioner,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, 

Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Agency No. A208 987 585

Before Southwick, Oldham, and Wilson, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Liduvina Concepcion Carcamo-Moya, a native and citizen of 

Honduras, petitions for review of an order by the Board of Immigration 

Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing her appeal from the denial of her applications 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 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opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 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 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

August 10, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 22-60003 Document: 00516427907 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/10/2022
No. 22-60003

2

for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention 

Against Torture (“CAT”).

We review the BIA’s decision and consider the immigration judge’s

(“IJ”) decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA. Singh v. Sessions, 

880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018). Factual findings are reviewed for

substantial evidence, meaning that this court may not overturn factual 

findings unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Aviles-Tavera v. 

Garland, 22 F.4th 478, 482–83 (5th Cir. 2022). 

Carcamo-Moya’s applications for asylum and withholding of removal 

are premised on membership in a particular social group (“PSG”) comprised 

of “informants, witnesses[,] and victims of crimes committed by gangs and 

other organized criminal groups.” The IJ held that her proposed PSG was 

not cognizable, and she did not challenge the issue before the BIA. Thus, 

because Carcamo-Moya cannot show that any alleged past or future 

persecution was based on membership in a PSG, her claims fail. See Sharma 

v. Holder, 729 F.3d 407, 411 (5th Cir. 2013). It is therefore unnecessary to 

reach Carcamo-Moya’s other issues related to asylum and withholding of 

removal on review. See INS v. Bagamasbad, 429 U.S. 24, 25 (1976) (“As a 

general rule courts and agencies are not required to make findings on issues 

the decision of which is unnecessary to the results they reach.”). To the 

extent that Carcamo-Moya is attempting to raise a new PSG on review of 

“family members of victims of gang crime who are then persecuted by the 

same gang,” this court lacks jurisdiction to address it because she failed to 

raise it before the BIA in the first instance. See Martinez-Guevara v. Garland, 

27 F.4th 353, 360 (5th Cir. 2022). 

Regarding the denial of her CAT claim, the evidence identified by 

Carcamo-Moya on review, including a report referencing police corruption 

in Honduras and her testimony that the police did not assist her, does not 

Case: 22-60003 Document: 00516427907 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/10/2022
No. 22-60003

3

compel a reversal of the IJ’s determination that she could not establish the 

state action requirement of her CAT claim. See Aviles-Tavera, 22 F.4th at 

486. Carcamo-Moya conceded that the police “did the rounds” when 

investigating her son’s murder. We have held that “a foreign government’s 

failure to apprehend the persons threatening the alien or the lack of financial 

resources to eradicate the threat or risk of torture do not constitute sufficient 

state action.” Id. (quotation marks and citation omitted). Furthermore, as 

held by the IJ, the letters submitted in support of Carcamo-Moya indicate 

that the police are not complicit in the criminality related to her situation. 

Finally, the report referenced by Carcamo-Moya states that corruption 

improved after 2014. 

Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED in part and

DISMISSED in part. 

Case: 22-60003 Document: 00516427907 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/10/2022