Escobar Calderon v. Ashcroft

Good Law
117 F. App'x 544
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 8, 2004Nos. 03-73965, A72-114-159California379 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Armin Celido Escobar Calderon, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s (IJ) order denying his claims for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . Reviewing for substantial evidence, Melkonian v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 1061, 1065 (9th Cir.2003), we deny the petition for review.

Escobar Calderon contends that the IJ erred by failing to find him eligible for asylum and withholding of removal based on imputed political opinion, where he and his father served in the civil defense. Substantial evidence, however, supports the IJ’s decision because Escobar Calderon failed to demonstrate that his two encounters with guerrillas in Guatemala were on account of imputed political opinion or any other statutorily protected ground. See Melkonian, 320 F.3d at 1064 (requiring evidence that applicant was targeted for conscription based on an enumerated ground).

Further, substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that Escobar Calderon failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution motivated by his refusal to join the guerrillas.…

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.