Aristides Soto Mansilla v. Loretta E. Lynch

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Aristides Soto Mansilla v. Loretta E. Lynch, 670 F. App'x 447 (9th Cir. 2016)

Aristides Soto Mansilla v. Loretta E. Lynch

Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Aristides Soto Mansilla (“Soto”) petitions for review ofan order of the Board of *448 Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his application for special rule cancellation of removal under the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (“NACARA”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and we deny the petition.

Relief under NACARA is unavailable to any applicant who has “incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B)(i); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1240.66(a). Soto told an immigration officer that as a sergeant in the Guatemalan military, he informed on suspected guerillas, knowing that they would likely be tortured. After guerillas were identified, the military would send a special G-2 intelligence team, who would take the suspected guerillas to the base to be investigated and tortured. He identified at least some of the suspected guerillas because they “had fliers.” This evidence indicates that Soto was both personally involved in and purposefully assisted persecution on account of political opinion, 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). Soto failed to carry that burden. Therefore, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Soto assisted in persecution and was ineligible for NACARA special rule cancellation of removal.

DENIED.

*

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Reference

Full Case Name
Aristides Soto MANSILLA, Petitioner, v. Loretta E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent
Status
Unpublished