Elvin Castillo-Gutierrez v. Loretta E. Lynch
809 F.3d 449
| 8th Cir. | 2016Background
- Castillo, a native of Nicaragua, entered the U.S. illegally in 2006 and is removable; he seeks asylum/withholding/CAT relief based on fear of police retaliation if returned.
- Castillo’s brother Noel was beaten to death by local police; Miguel witnessed the killing and received a verbal threat from an officer but has not been harmed.
- Castillo’s brother Orlando filed a police complaint and contacted a human-rights group; Orlando lives nearby and reports police scrutiny but no physical harm.
- No prosecutions of the officers occurred; family members and Miguel remain unharmed to date.
- The IJ denied asylum, withholding, and CAT relief; the BIA affirmed, finding Castillo’s fear not objectively reasonable and noting lack of prosecutorial or retaliatory history.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Castillo has past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on protected grounds to obtain asylum | Castillo says returning will lead him to publicly seek justice for Noel, increasing risk of police retaliation — fear is subjectively genuine and supported by country-condition evidence | Government argues no objective evidence shows complainants are persecuted; family and witness remain unharmed, undermining claim of likely retaliation | Court: Fear not objectively reasonable; asylum denied |
| Whether Castillo meets the higher "clear probability" standard for withholding of removal | Castillo relies on same facts/country conditions to show likelihood of persecution | Government: failure to meet asylum standard means withholding not established; no clear probability shown | Court: Withholding denied (clear probability not met) |
| Whether Castillo qualifies for protection under the Convention Against Torture | Castillo points to country-condition reports and anticipated police retaliation | Government: Castillo presented no independent factual basis distinct from asylum claim; CAT requires separate showing | Court: CAT relief denied (no alternative factual basis) |
| Whether BIA decision is supported by substantial evidence | Castillo argues IJ credibility and documentary country evidence compel a different result | Government defends BIA’s consideration of witness/family safety and limited incidents in record | Court: Substantial evidence supports BIA; petition for review denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Melecio-Saquil v. Ashcroft, 337 F.3d 983 (8th Cir. 2003) (standard for affirming agency denial of asylum under substantial-evidence review)
- INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478 (1992) (burden on asylum applicant to show well-founded fear of persecution)
- Malonga v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 546 (8th Cir. 2008) (clear-probability standard for withholding is more onerous than asylum standard)
- Alemu v. Gonzales, 403 F.3d 572 (8th Cir. 2005) (CAT relief requires alternative factual basis when asylum claim fails)
- Perinpanathan v. INS, 310 F.3d 594 (8th Cir. 2002) (objective-reasonableness requirement for fear of persecution)
- Feleke v. INS, 118 F.3d 594 (8th Cir. 1997) (fear must be subjectively genuine and objectively reasonable)