Samayoa Cabrera v. Barr


United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit No. 18-1923 JUAN ALECIO SAMAYOA CABRERA, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM P. BARR,* Attorney General, Respondent. PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AN ORDER OF THE BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS Before Lynch, Selya, and Barron, Circuit Judges. Randy Olen for petitioner. Sarah K. Pergolizzi, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation, U.S. Department of Justice, with whom Joseph H. Hunt, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, and Kohsei Ugumori, Senior Litigation Counsel, were on brief, for respondent. October 1, 2019 * Pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2), Attorney General William P. Barr has been substituted for former Attorney General Jefferson B. Sessions, III as the respondent. BARRON, Circuit Judge. Juan Alecio Samayoa Cabrera ("Samayoa"), a citizen of Guatemala who arrived in the United States without admission or parole, petitions for review from a ruling by the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") rejecting his request for deferral of removal pursuant to the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We deny the petition in part and dismiss it in part. I. In 1992, Samayoa entered the United States from Guatemala without inspection. Soon thereafter, he applied for asylum. His application was rejected by the immigration judge ("IJ"), who instead granted him voluntary departure contingent on him leaving the country within 60 days and ordered him removed if he failed to do so. The BIA then affirmed that ruling, and we denied his petition for review from the BIA's decision. See Samayoa Cabrera v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 2004). Samayoa's removal proceedings were conditionally terminated in 2011 after he obtained a temporary U visa, which permitted him to remain in the United States.1 By 2017, however, his U visa had expired and the government again initiated removal proceedings against him. 1 A U visa is available to certain victims of crimes who assist government officials in investigating or prosecuting those crimes. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(U). - 2 - In those proceedings, Samayoa conceded that he had entered this country without admission or parole, see 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i), but sought various forms of relief from removal. By the time of his removal hearing before the IJ, Samayoa had narrowed those claims for relief to just one: deferral of removal under the CAT. The IJ rejected that request for relief, however, and the BIA then affirmed the IJ's ruling. Samayoa now petitions for review from the BIA's decision. II. To make out a successful CAT claim, Samayoa must show that it is "more likely than not that he . . . would be tortured if removed to the proposed country of removal." 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2). For these purposes, "torture" is defined as: (1) an act causing severe physical or mental pain or suffering; (2) intentionally inflicted; (3) for a proscribed purpose; (4) by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official who has custody or physical control of the victim; and (5) not arising from lawful sanctions. Settenda v. Ashcroft, 377 ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals