# United States Court **of Appeals**  **f or the Fifth Circuit** 

**____________** No. 23

- 60476 Summary Calendar

**____________ Reina Maria Gamoneda** 

**- Romero,** 

Petitioner **,**

versus
**Merrick Garland,** U.S. Attorney General **,** Respondent

**.**

**______________________________** Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A201 405 524

**______________________________** Before **Barksdale, Graves,** and **Oldham,** Circuit Judges

**. Per Curiam**  **:** *****

Reina Maria Gamoneda

- Romero, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ’ (BIA) order dismissing her appeal from an Immigration Judge ’s (IJ) denial of: asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT)

.

**_____________________**

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See **5th Cir . R.**  47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 6, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-60476 Document: 36-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/06/2024No. 23

- 60476

2 Our court reviews the BIA’s decision and considers the IJ’s decision only to the extent it influenced the BIA. E.g. , Singh v. Sessions , 880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018). The denial of asylum, withholding of removal , and CAT relief are reviewed for substantial evidence. E.g. , Zhang v. Gonzales , 432 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2005). Under that standard, “reversal is improper unless we decide not only that the evidence supports a contrary conclusion, but [also] that the evidence compels it”. Id

. (alteration and emphasis in original) (citation omit ted). On Gamoneda’s asylum and withholding

- of

- removal claims, the BIA concluded she did not show the requisite nexus between her alleged persecution and proposed particular social group (PSG)

. See, e.g. , Jaco v. Garland , 24 F.4th 395, 402 (5th Cir. 2021) (explaining “an applicant for asylum or withholding of removal must [show]”, inter alia , “a nexus between the persecution and her membership in the [PSG] ”). Gamoneda ’s proposed PSG is “single woman from Honduras with child unprotected”. She did not
pres ent evidence , however, compelling the conclusion that the motorcyclist crashed into her son and targeted her on account of her proposed PSG. See,
e.g. , Martinez

- De Umana v. Garland , 82 F.4th 303, 312 (5th Cir. 2023) ( “[C]onduct that is driven by criminal

. . . motives does not constitute persecution on account of a protected ground ”. (second alteration in original) (citation omitted)).

Gamoneda’s CAT

- claim challenge likewise fails because she has not shown she will , more like ly than not , be tortured with governmental acquiescence if repatriated. See, e.g. , Morales v. Sessions , 860 F.3d 812, 818 (5th Cir. 2017) (“[T]he United States may not remove an alien to a country in which the alien is more likely than not to be tortured . . . by, or with the acquiescence of, a public official” . (citation omitted) ). Instead, s he only provides evidence that violence by gang members against women in Honduras is prevalent. S ee Qorane v. Barr , 919 F.3d 904, 911 (5th Cir. 2019) Case: 23-60476 Document: 36-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/06/2024No. 23

- 60476

3 (“Generalized country evidence tells [ our court] little about the likelihood state actors will torture any particular person”

. )

. **DENIED**

. Case: 23-60476 Document: 36-1 Page: 3 Date Filed: 05/06/2024