NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS NOV 30 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
JESUS ALFREDO RIVERA CERON, No. 17-72834
Petitioner, Agency No. A200-552-996
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, Acting
Attorney General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 27, 2018**
Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Jesus Alfredo Rivera Ceron, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying withholding of removal and
protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction
*
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).
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the agency’s particularly
serious crime determination and review for substantial evidence the denial of CAT
relief. Konou v. Holder, 750 F.3d 1120, 1127, 1124 (9th Cir. 2014). We review de
novo questions of law. Ahmed v. Holder, 569 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2009). We
deny the petition for review.
The agency did not err or abuse its discretion in determining Rivera Ceron’s
conviction is a particularly serious crime that renders him ineligible for
withholding of removal, where the agency relied on the appropriate factors and
proper evidence in reaching its conclusion. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B)(ii);
Avendano-Hernandez v. Lynch, 800 F.3d 1072, 1077 (9th Cir. 2015) (court’s
review of the agency’s discretionary particularly serious crime determination is
limited to ensuring the agency relied on the appropriate factors and proper
evidence; the court may not reweigh the evidence). Rivera Ceron’s contention that
his conviction is not a per se particularly serious crime under 8 U.S.C.
§ 1231(b)(3)(B) is misplaced because the agency conducted a case-specific, not per
se, analysis. See 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B).
Because the particularly serious crime determination is dispositive, we do
not, and the BIA was not required to, address Rivera Ceron’s contentions that he
otherwise established eligibility for withholding of removal. See Simeonov v.
Ashcroft, 371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004).
2 17-72834
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of CAT protection, where
Rivera Ceron did not establish he would be tortured by or with the acquiescence of
the Guatemalan government. See Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1033
(9th Cir. 2014).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
3 17-72834