Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Patrick Anthony PRINCE, AKA Nkomo Mugabe Levene, AKA Tafari Williams, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM **
Petitioner Patrick Anthony Prince, a native and citizen of Jamaica, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) order affirming the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) decision denying his applications for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). Our appellate jurisdiction rests on 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1), and we deny the petition.
Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s conclusion that Petitioner has failed to establish a nexus between the harm he suffered and a protected ground. See Barajas-Romero v. Lynch, 846 F.3d 351, 358–60 (9th Cir. 2017); Sangha v. I.N.S., 103 F.3d 1482, 1486–87 (9th Cir. 1997). Petitioner argues he was, and will continue to be, subject to persecution because of his father’s support for Michael Manley and the People’s National Party (PNP). But Petitioner offered little detail about his father’s political support, and the only evidence in the record documenting his father’s activities in Jamaica described his involvement in a bloody gang dispute dating back decades. The record does not compel the conclusion that Petitioner’s imputed political opinion was a reason for the harm he suffered. See Barajas-Romero, 846 F.3d at 360. Petitioner has similarly failed to show that he would be threatened in the future because of an imputed political opinion.
Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s conclusion that Petitioner has failed to show a likelihood of future torture carried out or acquiesced in by Jamaican officials. Petitioner acknowledged that police shot his brother believing he was a thief, and he testified that his half-brother was accidentally killed by the police when they were chasing after someone else. Petitioner further testified that in most of his own encounters with violent attackers he was unable to identify the perpetrators and declined to report the events to the police. Petitioner has failed to show that he would be tortured upon return or that the police would be “unable or unwilling” to oppose any future attacks. See Garcia-Milian v. Holder, 755 F.3d 1026, 1034 (9th Cir. 2014).
PETITION DENIED.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 15-73652
Decided: June 29, 2018
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)