Jaime Martinez-De Paz v. Jefferson Sessions, III, No. 17-60416 (5th Cir. 2018)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 17-60416 Document: 00514482464 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/22/2018 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit No. 17-60416 Summary Calendar FILED May 22, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk JAIME ALBERTO MARTINEZ-DE PAZ, Petitioner v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS, III, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A205 300 886 Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jaime Alberto Martinez-De Paz, a native and citizen of El Salvador, has petitioned this court for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Reviewing the BIA’s factual findings for substantial evidence, see Orellana-Monson v. Holder, 685 F.3d 511, 517-18 (5th Cir. 2012), we deny the petition. Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * Case: 17-60416 Document: 00514482464 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/22/2018 No. 17-60416 First, the BIA reasonably applied this court’s precedent to the facts in concluding that Martinez-De Paz’s account of a single incident of criminal economic extortion by gang members was not cognizable as persecution for asylum purposes. See Morales v. Sessions, 860 F.3d 812, 815 (5th Cir. 2017); Castillo-Enriquez v. Holder, 690 F.3d 667, 668 (5th Cir. 2012)). Martinez fails to demonstrate that the evidence compels a different result. See OrellanaMonson, 685 F.3d at 518. Second, because Martinez-De Paz failed to establish his eligibility for asylum, he necessarily failed to meet the higher standard applicable to withholding of removal. See id. Third, Martinez demonstrates no error in the BIA’s rejection of his speculative claim that he would be tortured with the acquiescence of government officials upon his return to El Salvador. See Morales, 860 F.3d at 818. PETITION DENIED. 2

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.