Case: 19-60553 Document: 00515887942 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/04/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 4, 2021 No. 19-60553 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Melvin Alexis Cortez-Ramirez, Petitioner, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A206 773 085 Before Owen, Chief Judge, Jolly, and Dennis, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Petitioner Melvin Cortez-Ramirez entered the United States illegally in 2014. After he was charged with being subject to removal, he filed an application for asylum, a petition for withholding of removal, and an application for protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture. All of these requests for relief were denied, first by United States * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 19-60553 Document: 00515887942 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/04/2021 No. 19-60553 Customs and Immigration Services, then by an Immigration Judge, and finally by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Cortez-Ramirez petitions this court for review. We deny the petition. I. Petitioner Melvin Cortez-Ramirez (“Petitioner” or “Cortez- Ramirez”) is a citizen of El Salvador. On May 25, 2014, Cortez-Ramirez illegally entered Texas without having been admitted or paroled. Agents of the Department of Homeland Security subsequently served Cortez-Ramirez with a notice to appear before an Immigration Judge (“IJ”). He was charged with being subject to removal, as an alien unlawfully present, under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). Petitioner filed an application for asylum, a petition for withholding of removal, and an application for protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). As the basis of these requests, Petitioner claims that he was and reasonably fears that he would again be subjected to persecution in El Salvador because of his religious beliefs, his political opposition to criminal gangs, and his membership in his family and in the social group “Salvadoran Evangelical Young Males Who Oppose Criminal Activity for Moral and Religious Reasons.” United States Customs and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) denied all of Petitioner’s requests for relief. A hearing was then held before an Immigration Judge, who likewise denied Petitioner’s requests for relief and ordered him removed to El Salvador. Petitioner appealed this decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA” or “Board”). The Board dismissed Petitioner’s appeal. This petition for review followed. 2 Case: 19-60553 Document: 00515887942 Page: 3 Date Filed: 06/04/2021 No. 19-60553 II. We review questions of law de novo. Miresles-Zuniga v. Holder, 743 F.3d 110, 112 (5th Cir. 2014). The BIA’s interpretation of immigration statutes is entitled to deference according to the rubric set forth in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984). Garcia-Carias v. Holder, 697 F.3d 257, 263 (5th Cir. 2012). Factual findings of the Board are reviewed under the substantial evidence standard. Such findings are accepted as true …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals