Franklin Omar Brenes-Flores v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FRANKLIN OMAR BRENES-FLORES,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 17-70618
Agency No. A208-204-027
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Franklin Omar Brenes-Flores, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from
an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
* 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
DEC 20 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 17-70618
We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
the agency’s factual findings, Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th
Cir. 2014), and we deny the petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of asylum and withholding
of removal because Brenes-Flores failed to establish a nexus between the harm he
fears and a protected ground. See Ayala v. Holder, 640 F.3d 1095, 1098 (9th Cir.
2011) (mistreatment motivated by retribution does not bear a nexus to a protected
ground).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of Brenes-Flores’s CAT
claim because he has not shown it is more likely than not he would be tortured by
the government of Guatemala or with its consent or acquiescence. See Garcia-
Milian, 755 F.3d at 1034-35.
We reject Brenes-Flores’s contention regarding proceedings before the
asylum officer and the IJ.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --