Appellate Case: 20-9502 Document: 010110718259 Date Filed: 08/01/2022 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT August 1, 2022 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court CARLOS E. LOCKWOOD ALVAREZ, Petitioner, v. No. 20-9502 (Petition for Review) MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT * _________________________________ Before HOLMES, BACHARACH, and EID, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ In 2018, Carlos E. Lockwood Alvarez, a citizen of Mexico, attempted U.S. entry without possessing a valid entry document. The Department of Homeland Security charged Lockwood Alvarez with inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) and the Immigration Judge (IJ) found clear and convincing evidence supporting the charge. Lockwood Alvarez then applied for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The IJ denied the application and Lockwood Alvarez appealed the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The BIA found no clear error in the IJ’s denial, concluding that “it is not * This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. Appellate Case: 20-9502 Document: 010110718259 Date Filed: 08/01/2022 Page: 2 more likely than not that [Lockwood Alvarez] will experience torture at the hands of public officials in Mexico,” and it dismissed the appeal. R. Vol. I at 3. Lockwood Alvarez now seeks review of the BIA’s decision. He argues, in part, that the BIA erred by applying the clear error standard to the IJ’s factual finding for the relocation factor under 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(3)(ii). However, looking exclusively to the BIA’s decision, the BIA rested its relocation conclusion on a purely factual finding supported by substantial evidence under the proper legal standards. Thus, we deny Lockwood Alvarez’s petition for judicial review. We also grant Lockwood Alvarez’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. I. In 2011, Lockwood Alvarez, a citizen of Mexico, was removed from the United States to Mexico. According to Lockwood Alvarez’s testimony, after his removal he was kidnapped and tortured for multiple days in Tijuana, Mexico by police officers but escaped. He then relocated to Puerta Vallarta, Mexico where he was kidnapped and tortured a second time by police officers but again escaped. Lockwood Alvarez relocated back to Tijuana where he lived for two years without experiencing kidnapping or torture. Working as an electrician, he later received a shooting threat from his employer. Following the threat, in 2018, Lockwood Alvarez sought U.S. admission at the border in San Ysidro, California, without a valid entry document. The Department of Homeland Security charged him with inadmissibility under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I). 2 Appellate Case: 20-9502 Document: 010110718259 Date Filed: 08/01/2022 Page: 3 The IJ found clear and convincing evidence supporting the charge. Lockwood Alvarez then applied for deferral of removal under CAT and the IJ denied his application. The IJ …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals