Felix Alvarado Flores v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FELIX ALVARADO FLORES,
Petitioner,
v.
JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney
General,
Respondent.
No. 15-70716
Agency No. A029-307-512
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted December 18, 2017**
Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.
Felix Alvarado Flores, a native and citizen of Honduras, petitions for review
of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an
immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal
and relief 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).
FILED
DEC 22 2017
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 2 --

2 15-70716
under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual
findings. Silaya v. Mukasey, 524 F.3d 1066, 1070 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny the
petition for review.
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s determination that Alvarado
Flores was both personally involved in and purposefully assisted persecution on
account of political opinion, see Miranda Alvarado v. Gonzales, 449 F.3d 915, 927
(9th Cir. 2006), shifting the burden to him to prove that he was not a persecutor,
see 8 C.F.R. § 1240.8(d). Alvarado Flores failed to carry that burden. Thus,
substantial evidence supports the agency’s conclusion that Alvarado Flores was
ineligible for withholding of removal. See id. at 928-29 (persecutor bar applied
where petitioner’s actions were integral to furthering the persecution of others).
Substantial evidence also supports the agency’s denial of CAT relief because
Alvarado Flores failed to establish it is more likely than not he would be tortured
by or with the consent or acquiescence of the Honduran government. See Zheng v.
Holder, 644 F.3d 829, 835-36 (9th Cir. 2011) (fear of torture speculative).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --