From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Quiroz v. Lynch

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Dec 15, 2015
623 F. App'x 505 (9th Cir. 2015)

Opinion

No. 13-74382

12-15-2015

JORGE LUIS QUIROZ, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Agency No. A014-658-739 MEMORANDUM On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Before: WALLACE, RAWLINSON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

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

Jorge Luis Quiroz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' ("BIA") order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision finding him removable and denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law, Coronado v. Holder, 759 F.3d 977, 982 (9th Cir. 2014), and review for substantial evidence the agency's factual findings, Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Quiroz's conviction under Nevada Revised Statutes § 201.230 is categorically "sexual abuse of a minor" under 8 U.S.C § 1101(a)(43)(F) and is therefore an aggravated felony. See Cedano-Viera v. Ashcroft, 324 F.3d 1062, 1065-66 (9th Cir. 2003). Contrary to Quiroz's contention, his conviction constitutes a conviction for immigration purposes. See United States v. Guerrero-Velasquez, 434 F.3d 1193, 1197 (9th Cir. 2006).

Substantial evidence supports the BIA's denial of protection under the CAT, where Quiroz failed to show it is more likely than not he will be tortured by or with the consent, acquiescence or willful blindness of the government if removed to Mexico. See Silaya, 524 F.3d at 1073.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Quiroz's contention that the BIA erred in denying CAT based in part on Quiroz's failure to identify a particular government official whom he feared, where he failed to exhaust the claim before the BIA. See Tijani v. Holder, 628 F.3d 1071, 1080 (9th Cir. 2010).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.


Summaries of

Quiroz v. Lynch

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Dec 15, 2015
623 F. App'x 505 (9th Cir. 2015)
Case details for

Quiroz v. Lynch

Case Details

Full title:JORGE LUIS QUIROZ, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Dec 15, 2015

Citations

623 F. App'x 505 (9th Cir. 2015)