Edwin Roberto Giron-Villatoro v. U.S. Attorney General

USCA11 Case: 21-13431 Date Filed: 08/02/2022 Page: 1 of 7 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 21-13431 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ EDWIN ROBERTO GIRON-VILLATORO, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A094-270-497 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 21-13431 Date Filed: 08/02/2022 Page: 2 of 7 2 Opinion of the Court 21-13431 Before WILSON, ANDERSON, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Edwin Giron-Villatoro (“Petitioner”), a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immi- gration Appeals (“BIA”) denying Petitioner’s motion to reopen his removal proceedings. Petitioner sought reopening based on newly-available evidence for his application for relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). No reversible error has been shown; we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition. Petitioner entered the United States in 1990 as a non-immi- grant visitor for pleasure. Petitioner later became a lawful perma- nent resident in 2008. In 2017, Petitioner was convicted of conspir- acy to distribute 5 kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. In the light of Petitioner’s 2017 conviction, the Department of Homeland Security charged Petitioner as removable for having been convicted of an aggravated felony. Petitioner conceded re- movability. In March 2020, Petitioner applied for deferral of removal un- der CAT. Briefly stated, Petitioner said he feared that, if returned to Honduras, he would be tortured by gang members with the ac- quiescence of the Honduran government. Petitioner returned to Honduras only one time after first arriving in the United States in 1990. During that three-day visit in 2009, Petitioner says he was USCA11 Case: 21-13431 Date Filed: 08/02/2022 Page: 3 of 7 21-13431 Opinion of the Court 3 “harassed,” “interrogated,” and “followed” by people he later learned were members of the MS-13 gang. Petitioner says he was targeted by the gang members because he was from the United States and was, thus, perceived as wealthy. Petitioner never re- ported the 2009 incident to the Honduran police because he said the police “work together” with the criminal organizations. Peti- tioner also said his cousin was killed by gang members after his cousin was deported to Honduras in 2013. In support of his application for relief, Petitioner submitted a declaration from a purported expert on Honduras (Dr. Vanden). During his removal hearing, Petitioner sought to have Dr. Vanden testify by telephone about the country conditions in Honduras. Dr. Vanden, however, failed to answer his phone when called twice by the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) and once by Petitioner. After attempt- ing to reach Dr. Vanden for half an hour, the IJ directed the parties to begin closing arguments. When Dr. Vanden later returned Pe- titioner’s call, the IJ denied Petitioner’s request to have Dr. Vanden testify. The IJ explained that several unsuccessful efforts had al- ready been made to contact Dr. Vanden, that the evidence had since closed, and that closing arguments …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals