NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT __________ No. 20-2484 __________ STEVENS GUILMEUS, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA __________ On Petition for Review from the Board of Immigration Appeals No. A059-997-699 Immigration Judge: Honorable Mirlande Tadal __________ Argued on March 29, 2022 (Opinion Filed: July 19, 2022) Before: RESTREPO, ROTH and FUENTES, Circuit Judges Upnit K. Bhatti, Esq. [argued] Melanie L. Bostwick, Esq. Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe 1152 15th Street, N.W. Columbia Center Washington, DC 20005 Counsel for Petitioner William P. Barr, Esq. Dana M. Camilleri, Esq. United States Department of Justice Office of Immigration Litigation P.O. Box 878 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044 Jonathan A. Robbins, Esq. [argued] United States Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20530 Counsel for Appellee __________ OPINION* __________ RESTREPO, Circuit Judge. Stevens Guilmeus, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitions for review of the decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) to dismiss his appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denying withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). For the following reasons, the petition will be denied. I.1 Guilmeus entered the United States in 2009 at the age of eighteen as a lawful permanent resident. In 2019, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) placed him in removal proceedings after Petitioner was detained and charged with removability following criminal convictions in 2018. * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 1 As we write for the benefit of the parties, we set out only the facts necessary for the discussion that follows. 2 Before the IJ, Guilmeus applied for protection under CAT on the basis that the Haitian government would likely acquiesce to the torture he would suffer by his relatives, due to his sexual orientation.2 The IJ found Guilmeus’s testimony credible and observed that his mother and sister had provided testimony and affidavits corroborating aspects of his testimony. The IJ determined, however, that CAT relief was not warranted because Guilmeus had not demonstrated eligibility. The IJ observed that Guilmeus “testified that he does not believe any government actor would harm him.” Appx. 8. In addition, Guilmeus never reported any threats to authorities, in Haiti or the United States.3 The IJ did address the country condition evidence offered by Guilmeus, noting that “some civil leaders notice[d] a marked improvement in the efforts of the Haitian national police.” Id. On appeal, the BIA affirmed and adopted the IJ’s decision. The BIA agreed that Guilmeus failed to demonstrate eligibility. Guilmeus timely filed this petition for review. 2 Guilmeus also applied for asylum and withholding of removal. The IJ found that Guilmeus was barred from eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal for having been convicted of a particularly serious crime, and the BIA upheld that decision. Because Guilmeus’s briefs to this Court do not present any arguments concerning the withholding of removal based on his previous convictions, the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals