NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 16 2021
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARIO GONZALEZ-BELTRAN, No. 18-73119
Petitioner, Agency No. A027-409-609
v.
MEMORANDUM*
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted March 12, 2021**
San Francisco, California
Before: McKEOWN, IKUTA, and BRESS, Circuit Judges.
Mario Gonzalez-Beltran1 seeks review of the Board of Immigration
Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial
of withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture
*
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).
1
Petitioner states that his true name is Hugo Hernan Zelaya. We join the parties in
referring to him by the name listed on the docket.
(“CAT”). We review denials of withholding and CAT relief for substantial
evidence, and we “must uphold the agency determination[s] unless the evidence
compels a contrary conclusion.” Duran-Rodriguez v. Barr, 918 F.3d 1025, 1028
(9th Cir. 2019). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the
petition.
Gonzalez-Beltran fled El Salvador at fifteen years old, in 1981. In 1988 or
1989, he witnessed a murder of a Mara Salvatrucha (“MS-13”) gang leader in
Southern California. When he refused to reveal the shooter’s identity, MS-13
members beat him with baseball bats. In 1990, an MS-13 member in Los Angeles
shot him. Because he believes that he is still recognizable, that MS-13 “would
never forget somebody,” and that an MS-13 member who knows him was deported
to El Salvador, Gonzalez-Beltran fears persecution and torture in El Salvador.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Gonzalez-Beltran
has not shown a probability of persecution or a likelihood of torture. Gonzalez-
Beltran has had no incidents with MS-13 for over twenty years, and his assertion
that MS-13 would look for him in El Salvador, but not in San Diego, near where
the original incidents occurred, is speculative. See Lim v. INS, 224 F.3d 929, 938
(9th Cir. 2000) (concluding that despite death threats and murders of the
petitioner’s colleagues, the court could not conclude that “persecution will happen,
in the sense of being more likely than not,” given mitigating factors such as the
2
petitioner having lived for six years in the country in which he feared harm);
Mendez-Gutierrez v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 1168, 1172 (9th Cir. 2006) (concluding
that “vague and conclusory allegations of fear for his life” did not support a finding
of a well-founded fear of persecution, which is a less stringent standard than that
for withholding of removal).
Because we uphold the BIA’s determinations of Gonzalez-Beltran’s claims
for withholding of removal and CAT relief, we need not decide whether the BIA
erred in concluding that Gonzalez-Beltran has been convicted of a particularly
serious crime.
PETITION DENIED.
3