FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION OCT 22 2013
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ROBERTO CANDIDO-CARCAMO, No. 10-72733
Petitioner, Agency No. A029-558-690
v.
MEMORANDUM*
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Argued and Submitted October 9, 2013**
Pasadena, California
Before: PAEZ and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges, and ERICKSON, Chief District
Judge.***
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
**
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
*** The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, Chief District Judge for the U.S.
District Court for the District of North Dakota, sitting by designation.
Roberto Candido-Carcamo, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing his
appeal from the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for deferral of
removal under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).
Although Candido-Carcamo presented evidence that he would likely face
arrest or detention by the government of El Salvador due to his status as a deportee
and former gang member, such harms do not rise to the level of torture. Villegas v.
Mukasey, 523 F.3d 984, 988-89 (9th Cir. 2008). The IJ and BIA properly
considered the testimony of Candido-Carcamo’s two expert witnesses and the
related documentary evidence, and concluded that Candido-Carcamo had not met
his burden to show that it was more likely than not that he would be tortured by the
government of El Salvador. Substantial evidence supports this conclusion.
The IJ’s reliance on Candido-Carcamo’s treatment by gangs in the United
States as an indicator of his likely treatment in El Salvador gives us some pause,
but we agree with the BIA that, in light of the totality of the record evidence, a
reasonable fact finder would not be compelled to conclude that it is more likely
than not that petitioner would be tortured by gangs if returned to El Salvador. We
therefore agree with the BIA that a determination of government acquiescence is
unnecessary. See Eneh v. Holder, 601 F.3d 943, 949 (9th Cir. 2010).
DENIED.