Bolanos, et al v. Holder, No. 05-76930 (9th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS AUG 24 2010 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ANDRES BOLANOS, No. 05-76930 Petitioner, Agency No. A029-182-415 v. MEMORANDUM * ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted April 9, 2010 ** Pasadena, California Before: PREGERSON and BEEZER, Circuit Judges, and CONLON, District Judge.*** * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). *** The Honorable Suzanne B. Conlon, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois, sitting by designation. Andres Bolanos petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) decision finding him ineligible for withholding of removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B)(ii) and denying deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture ( CAT ). The parties are familiar with the facts of this case, which we explain here only to the extent necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction to review legal or constitutional claims, including whether the BIA failed to consider the appropriate factors or relied on improper evidence in making [a] particularly serious crime determination. Anaya-Ortiz v. Holder, 594 F.3d 673, 676 (9th Cir. 2010) (internal citations omitted); 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D). We also have jurisdiction over denials of deferral of removal under the CAT, which are always decisions on the merits, Lemus-Galvan v. Mukasey, 518 F.3d 1081, 1083 (9th Cir. 2008), and review for substantial evidence. Id. at 1084. We deny the petition for review. The BIA did not rely upon improper factors in determining that Bolanos committed a particularly serious crime. An immigration judge may rely on hearing testimony in making such a determination, even without a record of conviction. Anaya-Ortiz, 594 F.3d at 678-79. The BIA did address the Frentescu factors, including the nature of the conviction, the circumstances and underlying facts of the conviction, [and] the type of sentence imposed. Id. at 679; In re 2 Frentescu, 18 I. & N. Dec. 244, 247 (BIA 1982), superseded by statute in part, 8 U.S.C. § 1253(h) (1991). Therefore, the BIA properly denied Bolanos s application for withholding of removal. Bolanos did not meet his burden to show that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured if he returned to El Salvador. There is no evidence of past torture. Though Bolanos s mother died from random violence, there is no evidence that Bolanos or any member of his family, some of whom also served in government forces, live under any threat of torture at the hands of guerilla fighters. Substantial evidence supports the BIA s decision to deny deferral of removal under CAT. Accordingly, the petition for review is DENIED. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
