The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals denied a petition for review from Jose Fuentes-Pineda, a Salvadoran national and former gang member seeking protection from deportation under the Convention Against Torture. The court upheld a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying Fuentes-Pineda deferral of removal, ruling that substantial evidence supported the conclusion that El Salvador's harsh prison conditions do not constitute government-intended torture.
Fuentes-Pineda, a native and citizen of El Salvador, was a member of the Barrio 18 or "18th Street" gang, a rival organization to MS-13. He admitted to unlawfully entering the United States in 2022 and was convicted of murder in El Salvador. At his immigration hearing, Fuentes-Pineda was the sole witness and testified that he was forced to join the gang.
The petitioner sought deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture, arguing that he would face torture if returned to El Salvador. The Convention Against Torture provides protection for individuals who can demonstrate they would more likely than not be tortured by or with the acquiescence of government officials in their home country.
Fuentes-Pineda argued that he would face torture in Salvadoran prisons due to overcrowding, poor sanitary conditions, lack of medical care, and violence from other inmates and guards. He also claimed that police had previously tortured him in El Salvador. However, the immigration judge found that the evidence did not establish that any future mistreatment would constitute torture as defined under the Convention.
The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed the immigration judge's decision, finding that harsh prison conditions alone do not constitute torture under the Convention Against Torture unless they are specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering for purposes such as obtaining information or punishment.
On appeal to the Fifth Circuit, Fuentes-Pineda argued that the BIA erred in its analysis of the torture standard. However, the court found that substantial evidence supported the BIA's conclusion that the petitioner had not demonstrated he would more likely than not face torture if returned to El Salvador.
The Fifth Circuit emphasized that the Convention Against Torture requires proof of intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering by or with government acquiescence. The court distinguished between generally harsh prison conditions, which may constitute cruel treatment, and torture, which requires specific intent to cause severe suffering.
This decision reflects the high evidentiary burden faced by individuals seeking protection under the Convention Against Torture and demonstrates courts' careful scrutiny of claims based on poor prison conditions in home countries.