Jaime Martinez-De Paz v. Jefferson Sessions, III
This text of Jaime Martinez-De Paz v. Jefferson Sessions, III (Jaime Martinez-De Paz v. Jefferson Sessions, III) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
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
FILED No. 17-60416 May 22, 2018 Summary Calendar 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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 Orellana- Monson, 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.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Jaime Martinez-De Paz v. Jefferson Sessions, III, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jaime-martinez-de-paz-v-jefferson-sessions-iii-ca5-2018.