MANUEL MORALES-GUSCA, AKA Lenin Aparicio-Morales, AKA Rafa Hernandez Morales v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MANUEL MORALES-GUSCA, AKA
Lenin Aparicio-Morales, AKA Rafa
Hernandez Morales,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 13-73899
Agency No. A087-456-410
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted June 26, 2017**
Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.
Manuel Morales-Gusca, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigrations Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal
* 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).
FILED
JUL 7 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 13-73899
and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review questions of law de novo, Cerezo v. Mukasey,
512 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2008), except to the extent that deference is owed to
the BIA’s determination of the governing statutes and regulations, Simeonov v.
Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 535 (9th Cir. 2004). We review for substantial evidence
the agency’s factual findings. Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir.
2008). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not err in finding Morales-Gusca failed to establish
membership in a cognizable social group. See Ramirez-Munoz v. Lynch, 816 F.3d
1226, 1228-29 (9th Cir. 2016); see also Zetino v. Holder, 622 F.3d 1007, 1016 (9th
Cir. 2010) (applicant’s “desire to be free from harassment by criminals motivated
by theft or random violence by gang members bears no nexus to a protected
ground”). Thus, we deny the petition as to his withholding of removal claim.
Further, substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Morales-
Gusca’s CAT claim because he did not demonstrate it is more likely than not he
would be tortured by the Mexican government, or with its consent or acquiescence.
See Silaya, 524 F.3d at 1073.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --