Summary
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied Jose Fuentes-Pineda’s petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision denying deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. The court held that substantial evidence supported the finding that harsh Salvadoran prison conditions were not specifically intended to inflict torture and that Fuentes-Pineda’s individualized risk of future torture was speculative. The court withdrew its prior opinion and substituted this opinion.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the IJ made a finding on whether harsh prison conditions in El Salvador were specifically intended to inflict torture.
- Whether substantial evidence supported the IJ's and BIA's determination that Fuentes-Pineda failed to establish a clear probability that he would be tortured in El Salvador.
- Whether Fuentes-Pineda's removal rendered his petition for review moot.
Holdings
- The evidence did not compel a finding that El Salvador's harsh prison conditions were specifically intended to inflict torture. Substandard, cruel, or inhuman prison conditions, negligence, and substantial certainty that harm will result do not constitute CAT torture absent specific intent to inflict severe pain or suffering.
- Substantial evidence supported the IJ's and BIA's finding that Fuentes-Pineda failed to show that he more likely than not would be tortured if removed to El Salvador.
- The petition was not moot because affirmance of the BIA's order could produce adverse collateral legal consequences, including a potential period of inadmissibility.
Key quotations
“We uphold the BIA’s order for two reasons. First, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that El Salvador’s harsh prison conditions are not specifically intended by the government to inflict torture.” (2)
“So any harm must be intentionally inflicted to constitute torture. Negligent conduct, or substantial certainty that harm will result, does not suffice if the harm is not specifically intended.” (4)
“Substantial evidence supports the conclusion that El Salvador’s harsh prison conditions aren’t intentionally designed to inflict torture. And nothing in Fuentes-Pineda’s background compels us to reject the IJ’s findings.” (10)
Factual background
Jose Fuentes-Pineda, a native and citizen of El Salvador, was formerly a member of the Barrio 18 gang and was convicted of gang-related homicide. He testified that Salvadoran security forces had tortured him on two occasions, but that he also experienced other police encounters and an eleven-year prison term without treatment rising to the level of torture. He argued that his gang affiliation, past torture, and likely detention under El Salvador's state of exception made it more likely than not that he would be tortured upon removal.
Procedural history
An Immigration Judge found that Fuentes-Pineda could not establish a clear probability of future torture in El Salvador and denied CAT protection. After remand for further proceedings, the Board of Immigration Appeals adopted and affirmed the IJ's opinion. The Fifth Circuit denied the petition for review and held that the petition was not moot even though Fuentes-Pineda had been removed, because affirmance could carry collateral legal consequences, including a potential ten-year period of inadmissibility.