Medardo Santiago Alonzo v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General

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).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MEDARDO SANTIAGO ALONZO,
Petitioner,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,
Respondent.
No. 09-71584
Agency No. A071-531-967
MEMORANDUM*
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
Submitted August 8, 2012**
Before: ALARCÓN, BERZON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.
Medardo Santiago Alonzo, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for
review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal
from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum. We
have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence
FILED
AUG 13 2012
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 2 --

09-71584 2
factual findings. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009). We
deny the petition for review.
Santiago Alonzo contends that he was persecuted and has a well-founded
fear of persecution on account of his political opinion based on threatening letters
he received and a visit by armed men to his home. Substantial evidence supports
the agency’s conclusion that Santiago Alonzo did not establish past persecution or
a well-founded fear of persecution because he did not show a nexus between these
incidents and his actual or imputed political opinion. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias,
502 U.S. 478, 483 (1992) (petitioner must provide some evidence, direct or
circumstantial, of persecutor’s motive); Barrios v. Holder, 581 F.3d 849, 856 (9th
Cir. 2009) (petitioner did not show gang imputed any particular political belief to
him). Accordingly, his asylum claim fails. See Ochoa v. Gonzales, 406 F.3d 1166,
1172 (9th Cir. 2005).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

-- 2 of 2 --