Jose Estrada Hernandez v. Loretta E. Lynch

Good Law
606 F. App'x 403
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 30, 201514-71422California357 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Raul Mauro Centeno-Rodríguez, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions pro se 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 protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 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.

In his brief to the BIA, Centeno-Rodrí-guez argued he established eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal based on his membership in a social group of young men who refused recruitment by gangs. Substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that Centeno-Rodríguez failed to establish past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground. See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 740 (9th Cir.2009) (the REAL ID Act “requires that a protected ground represent' ‘one central reason’ for an asylum applicant’s persecution”); see also Santos-Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.