Court Opinion

ID: 9910904
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-18 20:00:44.949649+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:55:05.334384
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                          FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       DEC 18 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                            FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SERGIO FRANCISCO ALVAREZ                        No. 23-939
MALDONADO,                                      Agency No.
                                                A208-196-233
             Petitioner,

 v.                                             MEMORANDUM*

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,

             Respondent.

                     On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                         Board of Immigration Appeals

                           Submitted December 12, 2023**

Before:      WALLACE, LEE, and BUMATAY, Circuit Judges.

      Sergio Francisco Alvarez Maldonado, a native and citizen of Guatemala,

petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order

affirming without opinion an immigration judge’s decision denying his

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the

Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C.

§ 1252. We review for substantial evidence the BIA’s factual findings. Conde

Quevedo v. Barr, 947 F.3d 1238, 1241 (9th Cir. 2020). We deny the petition for

review.

      Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Alvarez

Maldonado failed to establish he was or would be persecuted on account of a

protected ground. See Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th Cir. 2010) (an

applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated by theft or

random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected ground”). Thus,

his asylum claim fails. Because Alvarez Maldonado failed to establish any nexus

at all, he also failed to satisfy the standard for withholding of removal. See

Barajas-Romero v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 351, 359-60 (9th Cir. 2017).

      Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of CAT protection

because Alvarez Maldonado failed to show it is more likely than not he will be

tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to

Guatemala. See Aden v. Holder, 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009).

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

                                         2                                       23-939