Cazahuatl Torres v. Garland


19-1370 Cazahuatl Torres v. Garland UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT SUMMARY ORDER RULINGS BY SUMMARY ORDER DO NOT HAVE PRECEDENTIAL EFFECT. CITATION TO A SUMMARY ORDER FILED ON OR AFTER JANUARY 1, 2007, IS PERMITTED AND IS GOVERNED BY FEDERAL RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 32.1 AND THIS COURT’S LOCAL RULE 32.1.1. WHEN CITING A SUMMARY ORDER IN A DOCUMENT FILED WITH THIS COURT, A PARTY MUST CITE EITHER THE FEDERAL APPENDIX OR AN ELECTRONIC DATABASE (WITH THE NOTATION “SUMMARY ORDER”). A PARTY CITING TO A SUMMARY ORDER MUST SERVE A COPY OF IT ON ANY PARTY NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL. At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 20th day of May, two thousand twenty-one. Present: DEBRA ANN LIVINGSTON, Chief Judge, GUIDO CALABRESI, WILLIAM J. NARDINI, Circuit Judges. _____________________________________ ESTEBAN CAZAHUATL TORRES, Petitioner, v. 19-1370 MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. _____________________________________ For Petitioner: DAVID A. HOFFMAN, (W. Logan Lewis, on the brief), Vinson & Elkins, LLP, New York, NY; Juan Quevedo Gutierrez, The Bronx Defenders, Bronx, NY. For Respondent: CHRISTIN M. WHITACRE, Trial Attorney, Office of Immigration Litigation (Kohsei Ugumori, Senior 1 Litigation Counsel, on the brief), United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC. UPON DUE CONSIDERATION of this petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the petition for review is GRANTED. Petitioner Esteban Cazahuatl Torres (“Cazahuatl Torres”), a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of an April 19, 2019, decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming a December 7, 2018, decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying Cazahuatl Torres’s application for withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). In re Esteban Cazahuatl Torres, No. A 201 157 757 (B.I.A. Apr. 19, 2019), aff’g No. A 201 157 757 (Immig. Ct. N.Y.C. Dec. 7, 2018). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts and procedural history. We review the IJ’s decision as modified by the BIA, see Xue Hong Yang v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 426 F.3d 520, 522 (2d Cir. 2005), reviewing the agency’s legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings under the substantial evidence standard. See Y.C. v. Holder, 741 F.3d 325, 332 (2d Cir. 2013). Cazahuatl Torres claims that he has been the continued target of a smuggler in Mexico named “Salvador” after he identified two of Salvador’s smuggling guides to U.S. immigration officials in 2011. In addition to allegations of threats that he received in Mexico from 2011 to 2015, Cazahuatl Torres alleges that he was also subject to kidnapping, sexual assault, and abuse in the United States at the hands of a smuggler named “Pablo” after he arrived in Arizona in 2015. Specifically, the IJ found credible Cazahuatl Torres’s testimony that Pablo “confronted” Cazahuatl Torres after he arrived in the United …

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