The Ninth Circuit has rejected a petitioner’s claim that the particular social group comprised of people who report the criminal activity of gangs to the police is cognizable for withholding of removal purposes. In so doing, the court noted that “the record is devoid of any society specific evidence, such as country reports, background documents, or news articles, which would establish that persons who ‘report the criminal activity of gangs to the police’ are perceived or recognized as a group by society in Guatemala.”
The court was careful to note that its decision did “not foreclose the possibility that reporting gang violence to police could suffice to establish eligibility. For example, if there were evidence that, in a specific country, people in the community knew who reported crimes to the police, or if there were laws protecting those who did, the proposed group potentially could be cognizable. Here, however, Petitioner met with only one police officer; he was not in the main public precinct room but in a separate room when making the report; no evidence was taken from him; he was not photographed; and he did not cooperate with the police beyond making his complaint at the police office. As noted, Petitioner presented no evidence of a Guatemalan law or program protecting those who, without more, make police reports, and Petitioner presented no other evidence that Guatemalan society recognizes those who just report criminal activity of gangs to police as a particular social group.:”
The full text of Conde Quevedo v. Barr can be found here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/01/24/18-70078.pdf