Billy Calderon-Argumedo v. Attorney General United States
704 F. App'x 99
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- Petitioner Billy Calderon is a Salvadoran national who initially entered the U.S. in 2000, was deported in 2006, reentered in 2008, and later became an Evangelical Christian.
- Calderon has MS-13 gang affiliation and a 2005 conviction for automobile theft (leading to pretermission of withholding claim based on sentence length, which is not challenged here).
- In immigration custody Calderon underwent a reasonable fear interview (found none); DHS referred him for withholding-only proceedings; an IJ denied CAT (Convention Against Torture) relief; the BIA affirmed.
- Calderon claimed future torture risk from MS-13 due to gang threats, prior family violence, police unwillingness to help, the government’s alleged acquiescence or tacit support for anti-gang vigilantism, and heightened targeting as a Christian anti-gang activist.
- The IJ and BIA found no past torture, limited objective ties between family harm and Calderon, and insufficient evidence that he personally would more likely than not be tortured if removed; this factual finding was reviewed under the substantial-evidence standard.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the IJ/BIA applied correct acquiescence standard under CAT | Calderon: government officials are willfully blind/acquiescent to gang torture, so CAT relief should be available | Government: Even if acquiescence standard matters, IJ/BIA denied relief based on Calderon’s failure to show personal risk, not on acquiescence theory | Court: Argument irrelevant — IJ/BIA’s denial rested on lack of individualized risk, so no reversible error |
| Whether Calderon met burden to show it is more likely than not he would be tortured on return | Calderon: threats, family killings, police refusal, gang ability to locate him, and his Christian faith make torture more likely than not | Government: Record lacks evidence of past torture, family harm not tied to him, and insufficient proof of individualized likelihood; substantial evidence supports denial | Court: Affirmed — substantial evidence supports finding Calderon failed to show more-likely-than-not risk of torture |
Key Cases Cited
- Voci v. Gonzales, 409 F.3d 607 (3d Cir. 2005) (jurisdiction and review of BIA adoption of IJ reasoning)
- Tarrawally v. Ashcroft, 338 F.3d 180 (3d Cir. 2003) (substantial-evidence standard for BIA factual findings)
- Wang v. Ashcroft, 368 F.3d 347 (3d Cir. 2004) (affirming deference to BIA under substantial-evidence review)
- I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (1992) (burden of proof and standard for reversing factual findings)
- Green v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 694 F.3d 503 (3d Cir. 2012) (BIA need not address every piece of evidence)
- Huang v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 620 F.3d 372 (3d Cir. 2010) (discussion of BIA fact-finding and evidentiary consideration)