Marroquin Veliz v. Holder

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARROQUIN VELIZ v. HOLDER

Edgar Rolando MARROQUIN VELIZ, Petitioner, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-73380

2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24267

Submitted November 16, 2010. -- November 24, 2010

NOTICE:

PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.

Before: TASHIMA, BERZON, and CLIFTON, Circuit Judges.

Jaime A. Alcabes, Attorney, Law Office of Jaime A. Alcabes, Oakland, CA; Marie Kayal, The Law Office of Marie L. Kayal, San Bruno, CA for the petitioner. EDGAR ROLANDO MARROQUIN VELIZ, Petitioner, Pro se, South San Francisco, CA. OIL, Kathryn Deangelis, Attorney, Hillel Ryder Smith, DOJ - U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC; Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA for the respondent.

OPINION

MEMORANDUM*

Edgar Rolando Marroquin Veliz, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for protection under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA, applying the "willfull blindness" test of acquiescence, found Marroquin Veliz failed to establish "that he is more likely than not to be tortured by, or with the acquiescence of, anyone within governmental authority" upon return to Guatemala. Substantial evidence supports the BIA's denial of CAT relief. See Sinha v. Holder, 564 F.3d 1015, 1026 (9th Cir. 2009); Silaya, 524 F.3d at 1070.

We reject Marroquin Veliz's contention that the agency ignored the evidence of country conditions in the Country Report because he has not overcome the presumption that the agency reviewed the record. See Fernandez v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 592, 603 (9th Cir. 2006). We also reject Marroquin Veliz's contention that the BIA engaged in improper factfinding, because it is belied by the record.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

*This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.