Court Opinion

ID: 4360805
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2019-01-22 21:00:41.104848+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:47:05.264102
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JAN 22 2019
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LEYVER BLANCO-DOMINGUEZ, AKA                     No.   18-70495
Leyber Odyr Solorzano Dominguez,
                                                 Agency No. A206-104-720
                Petitioner,

 v.                                              MEMORANDUM*

MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting
Attorney General,

                Respondent.

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

                              Submitted January 15, 2019**

Before:      TROTT, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

      Leyver Blanco-Dominugez, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,

withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

      *
             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).
Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial

evidence the agency’s factual findings. Zehatye v. Gonzales, 453 F.3d 1182, 1184-

85 (9th Cir. 2006). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

      Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Blanco-Dominguez

failed to establish past persecution or a fear of future persecution on account of an

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

(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,

in this case, Blanco-Dominguez’s asylum and withholding claims fail.

      We lack jurisdiction to consider Blanco-Dominguez’s contentions regarding

CAT relief because he failed to raise the issue before the BIA. See Barron v.

Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004) (petitioner must exhaust issues or

claims in administrative proceedings below).

      PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

                                          2                                    18-70495