Jaime Martinez-De Paz v. Jefferson Sessions, III

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedMay 22, 2018
Docket17-60416
StatusUnpublished

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.

Bluebook
Jaime Martinez-De Paz v. Jefferson Sessions, III, (5th Cir. 2018).

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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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

Jose Orellana-Monson v. Eric Holder, Jr.
685 F.3d 511 (Fifth Circuit, 2012)
Luis Castillo-Enriquez v. Eric Holder, Jr.
690 F.3d 667 (Fifth Circuit, 2012)
Johana Herrera Morales v. Jefferson Sessions, III
860 F.3d 812 (Fifth Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
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.