Mexican National Whose Family Received Threats From Zetas Extortionists Is Denied US Asylum

"MX" for Borderland Beat; U.S. 5th Cir.

Request was denied by the U.S. 5th Cir.

Fidencio Munoz-Granados, a native and citizen of Mexico, was denied his request for U.S. asylum yesterday by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

At his hearing before an immigration judge on December 20, 2017, Munoz-Granados testified that he came to the United States as a teenager in 2003. Munoz-Granados learned from his father, Jose Fidencio Munoz de Hoyos ("Jose"), who remained in Mexico as a flea market vendor and member of the Confederation of Mexican Workers, that a trio of unknown individuals had extorted and beat him around the time Munoz-Granados left for the United States. Jose paid the money and the threats ended.

A similar event transpired in 2006. As before, Jose paid the demand to unidentified extortionists and the matter ended. Munoz-Granados then testified that around 2010 a drug cartel, Los Zetas, arrived in his home state of Coahuila. The Zetas began extorting 300 pesos per week from Jose as a quota for protection and the right to participate in the flea markets. Jose’s fellow flea market vendors received similar treatment.

After learning about the situation, Munoz-Granados, who had become a construction worker in Louisiana, began sending money to his family in Mexico to help cover expenses. At one point, around April 2014, the Zetas apparently beat Jose after he forgot to make his quota payments on time. According to Munoz-Granados, Jose responded by reporting the incident to the police,2 after which the Zetas beat him again and destroyed his merchandise until another vendor interceded.

Later, the Zetas told Jose they forgave him but would kill the first of his sons to return to Mexico. At this point Munoz-Granados became worried for his family and, because he was afraid to return to Mexico, applied for asylum in the United States.

Coahuila, the Mexican border state where his family lives

Meanwhile, back in Coahuila, Jose continued making weekly payments to the Zetas for several more years until he died from long-term health issues on October 3, 2017. Munoz-Granados testified that his family stopped paying quotas to Los Zetas when Jose died and had not received any demands or threats since doing so.

Nevertheless, Munoz-Granados stated that he remained afraid to return to Mexico because he believed the Zetas had identified him and would kill him.When asked by the IJ why he believed the Zetas would kill him upon his return to Mexico instead of extorting money from him, Munoz-Granados responded that the Zetas were mad at Jose for going to the police.

When pressed about the possibility of settling elsewhere in Mexico, such as with his girlfriend’s family in San Luis Potosí, Munoz-Granados testified that he believed the Zetas were "everywhere" in Mexico such that there were no places he could live safely. Munoz-Granados also explained that his construction skills would be useless in Mexico, so he would have little income.

Even so, he clarified that fear, not making less money, was the more important reason he did not want to return to Mexico. The immigratoin judge was "troubled" by inconsistencies between Munoz-Granados’s testimony and the documentary evidence he submitted, but nevertheless found Munoz-Granados "marginally credible."

The immigration judge then denied Munoz-Granados’s applications for asylum and withholding of removal, but declined to rule on his application for voluntary departure. Munoz-Granados appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), which dismissed his appeal, denied his motion to remand, and granted his application for voluntary departure.

Rejection reasons

The BIA concluded that Munoz-Granados failed to establish a well-founded fear of future persecution because Jose’s extortionists had not harmed, threatened, or made demands of Munoz-Granados’s mother and siblings since Jose passed away and, further, because Munoz-Granados had not established that he would be unable to avoid his father’s extortionists by relocating to a different part of Mexico.

Again, the evidence does not compel a contrary conclusion. Munoz-Granados testified that Jose made weekly payments to the Zetas starting in 2010, and that in 2014 the Zetas beat Jose the one time he was late in making payments.

Extortion rates in Mexico, as reported by the National System of Public Security (SNSP)

Yet Munoz-Granados stated that his family stopped making payments altogether in 2017 when Jose died and had received no demands or threats in the 3 months between Jose’s death and Munoz-Granados’s hearing before the immigration judge. This weakens Munoz-Granados’s claim of likely future persecution.

More importantly, Munoz-Granados failed to meet his burden to establish that it would be unreasonable for him to relocate to another part of Mexico, away from his father’s extortionists.

Munoz-Granados’s sole basis for claiming he could not reasonably relocate to another part of Mexico was his belief that the Zetas are "everywhere." This is not enough. First of all, Munoz-Granados himself conceded that “the Zetas are not as prominent in some parts of Mexico.” Second, while we do not question whether Los Zetas remains a forceful criminal enterprise, a fear of general violence and civil disorder is not sufficient to support a fear of future persecution.

To qualify for withholding of removal, an alien "must demonstrate a clear probability of persecution upon return."

Note: This post includes excerpts from the court document released by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The original and intact source is linked here.