CRISTOBAL TAMBRIZ-TZEP, AKA Cristobal Tambriz v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
CRISTOBAL TAMBRIZ-TZEP, AKA
Cristobal Tambriz,
Petitioner,
v.
LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 13-73357
Agency No. A205-716-962
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted November 18, 2015**
Before: TASHIMA, OWENS, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.
Cristobal Tambriz-Tzep, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se
for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum,
withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. We
FILED
NOV 25 2015
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

-- 1 of 2 --

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review de novo questions of law and
for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings. Mohammed v. Gonzales,
400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We review for abuse of discretion a
particularly serious crime determination. Arbid v. Holder, 700 F.3d 379, 385 (9th
Cir. 2012); Ceron v. Holder, 747 F.3d 773, 784-85 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc)
(setting aside prior case law holding that assault with a deadly weapon is a crime
involving moral turpitude). We deny the petition for review.
The agency did not abuse its discretion in determining that Tambriz-Tzep’s
conviction under California Penal Code § 245(a)(1) constitutes a particularly
serious crime where the agency properly analyzed “the nature of the conviction,
the underlying facts and circumstances and the sentence imposed.” Delgado v.
Holder, 648 F.3d 1095, 1107 (9th Cir. 2011) (en banc).
Substantial evidence supports the agency’s denial of relief under the
Convention Against Torture because Tambriz-Tzep failed to establish that it is
more likely than not that he would be tortured by or with the consent or
acquiescence of the government if returned to Guatemala. See Silaya v. Mukasey,
524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th Cir. 2008).
Tambriz-Tzep’s request that we hold his case in abeyance is denied as moot.
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
13-73357 2

-- 2 of 2 --