Turcios-Ortiz v. Bondi

── Turcios-Ortiz v. Bondi ── Court: Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit Date: May 19, 2026 Category: General Appellate Case: 25-9536 Document: 35-1 Date Filed: 05/19/2026 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS May 19, 2026 FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT _________________________________ Christopher M. Wolpert Clerk of Court DANIA PATRICIA TURCIOS- ORTIZ; M.D.Z.T, a minor, Petitioners, v. No. 25-9536 (Petition for Review) TODD BLANCHE, United States Attorney General, * Respondent. _________________________________ ORDER AND JUDGMENT ** _________________________________ Before McHUGH, CARSON, and ROSSMAN, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ Petitioners Dania Turcios-Ortiz and her minor son M.D.Z.T, both citizens and natives of Honduras, entered the United States unlawfully in * On April 2, 2026, Todd Blanche became Attorney General of the United States. Consequently, he has been substituted for Pamela J. Bondi as Respondent per Fed. R. App. P. 43(c)(2). ** This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.  Appellate Case: 25-9536 Document: 35-1 Date Filed: 05/19/2026 Page: 2 March 2021. 1 A year later, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initiated removal proceedings against them under 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). Ms. Turcios-Ortiz conceded removability but applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). On May 3, 2024, an immigration judge (IJ) denied all relief. In an oral ruling, the IJ determined Ms. Turcios-Ortiz was statutorily ineligible for withholding of removal under the serious nonpolitical crime bar in 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B)(iii), and not entitled to relief under CAT because she failed to show likelihood of torture if removed to Honduras, 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2). The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed Ms. Turcios-Ortiz’s appeal, and she now seeks review in this court. Exercising jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), we deny the petition for review. 1 M.D.Z.T is a derivative beneficiary on Ms. Turcios-Ortiz’s applications, meaning his eligibility for relief turns on her application. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(3)(A); 8 C.F.R. § 1208.21(a). On November 21, 2022, M.D.Z.T also filed his own application. RIII.74–87. Because the son’s claims here are based on Ms. Turcios-Ortiz’s claims, we use “Ms. Turcios-Ortiz” in our discussion to refer to both petitioners. 2  Appellate Case: 25-9536 Document: 35-1 Date Filed: 05/19/2026 Page: 3 I A2 On October 25, 2016, Ms. Turcios-Ortiz and Marlon Abel Zuniga (Marlon), her then-partner and the father of her three children, attended a late-night vigil at a local church. Marlon went home to retrieve a coat, and while there, a neighbor shot him over a supposed land dispute. Ms. Turcios- Ortiz learned about the shooting within minutes and rushed home to find Marlon laying in the front yard. Assisted by neighbors, she took Marlon to a hospital four hours away. Marlon’s father reported the shooting to the police, but