FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MAR 28 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS U .S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JOSE WILLIAM HERRERA-GRANDE, No. 09-73113
Petitioner, Agency No. A098-122-575
v.
MEMORANDUM *
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 8, 2011 **
Before: FARRIS, LEAVY and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Petitioner Jose William Herrera-Grande, a native and citizen of El Salvador,
petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum,
withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture
*
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).
(CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition for
review.
Substantial evidence supports the Board’s denial of asylum and withholding
of removal because Herrera-Grande failed to show he was or will be subject to
conduct rising to the level of persecution. See Hoxha v. Ashcroft, 319 F.3d 1179,
1182 (9th Cir. 2003) (holding that unfulfilled threats and an incident of physical
violence did not establish past persecution).
Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s denial of asylum and
withholding of removal because Herrera-Grande failed to show that gang members
threatened him on account of a protected ground. His fear of future persecution
based on an actual or imputed anti-gang or anti-crime opinion is not on account of
the protected ground of either membership in a particular social group or political
opinion. Ramos Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 854-56 (9th Cir. 2009); Santos-
Lemus v. Mukasey, 542 F.3d 738, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2008). Moreover, being a
witness to a murder does not establish the required nexus to a protected ground.
See Ochave v. INS, 254 F.3d 859, 865 (9th Cir. 2001) (“Asylum generally is not
available to victims of civil strife, unless they are singled out on account of a
protected ground.”)
2 09-73113
Substantial evidence also supports the Board’s denial of CAT relief based on
the Board’s finding that Herrera-Grande did not establish a likelihood of torture by,
at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of the El Salvadoran
government. See Arteaga v. Mukasey, 511 F.3d 940, 948-49 (9th Cir. 2007).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 09-73113