No. 18-67-ag Quintanilla v. Garland In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit AUGUST TERM 2020 No. 18-67 RICARDO QUINTANILLA-MEJIA, AKA RICARDO ELIUD QUINTANILLA-MEJIA, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General, Respondent. On Appeal from the Board of Immigration Appeals ARGUED: MARCH 1, 2021 DECIDED: JULY 9, 2021 _____ Before: CABRANES, RAGGI, and SULLIVAN, Circuit Judges. _____ Ricardo Quintanilla-Mejia petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision denying his application for statutory withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Petitioner faults the agency for denying relief without the Immigration Judge (“IJ”), (1) on all claims, ruling expressly as to his credibility; (2) on his withholding claim, considering the likelihood of his facing life-threatening injury in El Salvador as a member of a cognizable “social group,” specifically, (a) “former gang members who actively distance themselves from the gangs and work to oppose them,” or (b) “individuals working in El Salvador to rehabilitate youth in order to prevent their joining gangs,” Pet’r Br. at 10–11; and, (3) on his CAT claim, recognizing that, if returned to El Salvador, petitioner faces likely torture by the police or by gangs acting with the acquiescence of the police. The arguments do not persuade because, first, any failure by the IJ to make an explicit credibility finding requires no remand because the BIA explicitly assumed petitioner’s credibility in upholding the IJ’s decision, consistent with 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158(b)(1)(B)(iii) & 1231(b)(3)(C). Second, the IJ, sua sponte, effectively considered the social groups identified by petitioner in this court, and the record evidence considered in light of controlling precedent does not support, much less compel, the conclusion that these social groups bear the particularity or social distinction required for withholding of removal. Third, the record evidence also does not compel the conclusion that petitioner faces likely torture either directly by or indirectly with the acquiescence of Salvadoran police, as required for CAT relief. PETITION DENIED. ______________ ROBERT GRAZIANO, Buffalo, New York, for Petitioner. EVAN P. SCHULTZ (Joseph H. Hunt, Stephen J. Flynn, on the brief), United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, District of Columbia, for Respondent. 2 REENA RAGGI, Circuit Judge: Ricardo Quintanilla-Mejia (“Quintanilla”) is a citizen of El Salvador who has unlawfully entered, or attempted to enter, the United States four times in twenty years, the last three entries after removal by federal authorities. He now seeks to avoid another removal by petitioning this court for review of a 2017 decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA” or “Board”) upholding an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order authorizing reinstatement of a prior order of removal. See In re Ricardo Quintanilla-Mejia, No. A077 174 686 (BIA Dec. 26, 2017), aff’g No. A077 174 686 (Immigr. Ct. Batavia July 27, 2017). Quintanilla maintains that he is entitled to relief from removal pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(A), which mandates withholding of removal “if the Attorney General decides that the alien’s life or freedom would be …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals