Navarro Hercules v. Garland

FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT June 10, 2021 _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court JOSE NELSON NAVARRO HERCULES, Petitioner, v. No. 20-9604 (Petition for Review) MERRICK B. GARLAND, United States Attorney General, Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT** _________________________________ Before HOLMES, MATHESON, and McHUGH, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Petitioner, Jose Nelson Navarro Hercules, a Salvadoran citizen, fled gang violence in his home country and arrived in the United States in 2006. A few years later, the Department of Homeland Security began removal proceedings against him.  Merrick B. Garland has been substituted for Robert M. Wilkinson as Respondent. See Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). ** After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to honor the parties’ request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1. He conceded the charge of inadmissibility and applied for asylum, restriction on removal,1 and protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture. An immigration judge denied his applications, and the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) affirmed. Mr. Navarro Hercules now seeks review of the Board’s decision. We deny his petition in part and dismiss it in part. I. AGENCY PROCEEDINGS In his testimony to the immigration judge, Mr. Navarro Hercules explained why he fears returning to his home country. Starting in 2002, he worked on a bus in El Salvador, collecting fares while his brother-in-law drove. Two years later, armed gang members entered the bus and robbed those on board. They forced Mr. Navarro Hercules off the bus, beat him up, and demanded more money. They threatened to kill anyone who said anything about the attack. Mr. Navarro Hercules later heard from a police officer that the people who might have committed the bus robbery had been caught robbing a jewelry store. ROA, Vol. 1 at 139. About seven months after the bus robbery, gang members attacked the bus again when the bus stopped for a break en route. Mr. Navarro Hercules was resting in the bus while his brother-in-law went into a nearby town. Gang members attacked the brother-in-law and eventually surrounded the bus, accusing Mr. Navarro Hercules of causing some of their fellow gang members to be jailed. They vandalized the bus 1 Restriction on removal used to be called “withholding of removal.” Neri-Garcia v. Holder, 696 F.3d 1003, 1006 n.1 (10th Cir. 2012) (quotations omitted). 2 and threatened to decapitate Mr. Navarro Hercules. The attack ended when a local business owner convinced the gang members to leave. When police arrived at the scene, they initially blamed Mr. Navarro Hercules and his brother-in-law for the …

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