ROBERTO RIVERA-ROJAS V. MERRICK GARLAND, No. 17-71104 (9th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED MAR 19 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROBERTO CARLOS RIVERA-ROJAS, AKA Roberto Rivera, AKA Carlos Rojas Rivera, Petitioner, No. U.S. COURT OF APPEALS 17-71104 Agency No. A095-731-936 MEMORANDUM* v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted March 16, 2021** Before: GRABER, R. NELSON, and HUNSAKER, Circuit Judges. Roberto Carlos Rivera-Rojas, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the agency’s particularly serious crime determination. Avendano-Hernandez v. Lynch, 800 F.3d 1072, 1077 (9th Cir. 2015). We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir. 2014). We deny the petition for review. The agency did not abuse its discretion in determining that Rivera-Rojas’ conviction under California Penal Code Section 243.4(b) was a particularly serious crime that barred him from eligibility for asylum and withholding of removal, where it considered the appropriate factors to weigh the seriousness of the crime in a case-specific inquiry. See Avendano-Hernandez, 800 F.3d at 1077 (explaining that review is limited to ensuring that the agency relied on the “appropriate factors and proper evidence” and that the court may not reweigh the evidence (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because Rivera-Rojas failed to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if returned to Mexico. See Mairena v. Barr, 917 F.3d 1119, 1125-26 (9th Cir. 2019). PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED. 2 17-71104
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.
