Case: 19-60915 Document: 00515813656 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/08/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED April 8, 2021 No. 19-60915 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Carmen Xiomara Paz-Fernandez; Jose Ramon Martinez- Paz, Petitioners, versus Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A202 131 897 BIA No. A202 131 898 Before Davis, Stewart, and Dennis, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Carmen Xiomara Paz-Fernandez and her derivative beneficiary, Jose Ramon Martinez-Paz, are natives and citizens of Honduras. They petition for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.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: 19-60915 Document: 00515813656 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/08/2021 No. 19-60915 dismissing their appeal of an Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of their application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Paz-Fernandez argues the BIA erroneously determined that the harm she suffered did not rise to the level of past persecution, that she did not establish a well-founded fear of future persecution, and that she did not demonstrate that the Honduran government was unable or unwilling to control her persecutor. She further contends the BIA incorrectly concluded that she had not been tortured and ignored evidence showing that local police officers acquiesced to her persecutor’s violent acts. This court reviews the BIA’s decision and the IJ’s ruling, to the extent it affects the BIA’s decision. Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536 (5th Cir. 2009). We review factual findings for substantial evidence and legal questions de novo. Iruegas-Valdez v. Yates, 846 F.3d 806, 810 (5th Cir. 2017). Under substantial evidence review, reversal is improper unless this court decides “not only that the evidence supports a contrary conclusion, but also that the evidence compels it.” Chen v. Gonzales, 470 F.3d 1131, 1134 (5th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The evidence does not compel a conclusion that the police either condone the violent actions of Paz-Fernandez’s persecutor or are completely helpless to protect her, particularly considering that she has not sought help from local authorities and merely speculates that they would not protect her because some police officers appear to be friendly with her persecutor. See Gonzales-Veliz v. Barr, 938 F.3d 219, 231 (5th Cir. 2019). Paz-Fernandez argues that the BIA and IJ erred by requiring her to show conclusive evidence that it would have been futile to report her persecutor to the police, but we do not have jurisdiction to consider this argument because she did not exhaust it before the BIA. See Omari v. Holder, 562 F.3d 314, 318-19 (5th Cir. 2009). Paz-Fernandez’s failure to establish that the government is unable or 2 Case: 19-60915 Document: 00515813656 Page: 3 Date Filed: 04/08/2021 No. 19-60915 unwilling …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals