Fabricio Nunez Manjarrez v. Attorney General United States

NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 17-2577 ____________ FABRICIO NUNEZ MANJARREZ, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent ____________________________________________ On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA No. A 201-112-559) Immigration Judge: Steven A. Morley ____________________________________________ Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) On January 23, 2018 Before: GREENAWAY, JR., KRAUSE, Circuit Judges, and JONES, District Judge.* (Opinion filed: February 15, 2018) ___________ OPINION† * The Honorable John E. Jones, III, United States District Judge for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation. † This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. ___________ JONES, District Judge. Fabricio Nunez-Manjarrez appeals the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) affirmance of Immigration’s decision denying him withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). On appeal, Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez did not specifically challenge the Immigration Judge’s finding that he had not timely filed his application for asylum. The BIA affirmed the remainder of the Immigration Judge’s order, finding that Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez had not sufficiently shown past persecution or that he would suffer any future persecution because of certain statutorily protected grounds, and that Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez did not meet his burden of showing that torture would be more likely than not to occur if he were removed. We will affirm. I. Background Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez is a Mexican native and citizen who entered the United States without inspection on August 22, 2005. His entire family lives in La Barca, a town in Jalisco, Mexico. His father and grandfather own land in La Barca and, according to Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez, had been extorted by local gangs because of their success in growing crops and raising livestock. Two other members of Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez’s family suffered ill fates while Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez was in the United States. The first family member, a cousin on his father’s side, mysteriously disappeared after leaving a job interview, and the second family member, on his mother’s side, was killed. Although Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez does not know who committed these acts, he believes a criminal gang known as the “Zetas” was responsible. Id. Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez himself, however, 2 was never harmed while in Mexico. He also did not point to any other instances of harm coming to his immediate or extended family, which features up to twenty cousins, twenty uncles, and grandparents. Removal proceedings commenced against Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez on August 12, 2011. On August 31, 2011, Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez appeared before the York Immigration Court and requested time to submit an application of asylum, which he did on October 19, 2011, along with an application for withholding of removal and relief under CAT. Proceedings continued in the Philadelphia Immigration Court on July 1, 2013, where Mr. Nunez-Manjarrez conceded that his asylum application was untimely. Mr. Nunez- Manjarrez also stated at that time that he would be requesting voluntary departure as alternative relief. After an individual hearing on November 14, 2016, ...

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