N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
PATR IC K ANTHONY PRINC E, AKA Nkom o M uga

be Le ve ne , AKA Ta fari W illia m s, Pe t i tione r,
v. JEFFER SON B . SESSIONS III, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R e sponde nt. No. 15-73652 Age n c y No. A076-022-830
M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Argue d a nd Subm itte d

June 14, 2018 San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : SC HR OEDER

and GOULD, C irc uit Judge s , a nd DU, ** Distric t Judge
. Pe titione r Pa tric k Anthony Princ e , a native and c itiz e n of Ja

m a ic a , pe titions for re vie w of the B o a

rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ (B IA) orde r a ffirm ing the



# FIL ED JUN 29 2018 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public a t ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The Honora

ble M iranda

M . Du, Unite d State s Distric t Judge for the Distric t of Ne va d a , sitting by de signa tion.Im

m i gration Judge ’ s (IJ) de c i sion de ny ing his a pplic a t ions for withholding of
re m ova l a nd prote c tion unde r the C onve ntion Aga inst Torture(C AT). Our
a ppe lla te jurisdic tion re sts on 8 U.S.C . § 1252(a )(1), and we de ny the pe tition. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the B IA’ s c onc lusion tha

t Pe titione r ha s fa ile d to e s ta b lish a ne xus be twe e n the ha rm he suffe re d a

nd a prote c t e d ground. S

e e Barajas-Rome ro v . Ly n c h , 846 F.3d 351, 358–60 (9th C ir. 2017); Sangha v . I.N .S. , 103 F.3d 1482, 1486–87 (9th C ir. 1997). Pe titione r argue s he wa s , a nd will
c ontinue to be , subje c t to pe rse c ution be c a use of his fa

the r’ s support for M ic ha e l M an le y and the Pe ople ’ s Nationa l Pa rty (PNP). B ut

Pe titione r offe re d littlede ta il
a bout his fa

the r’ s politic a l support, a

nd the only

e vide nc e in the re c o rd doc um e nting his fa

the r’ s a c tivitie s in Ja

m a ic a de sc ribe d his involvem e n t in a bloody ga ng disputedating ba c k de c a de s. The re c ord doe s not c om pe l the
c onc lusion tha

t Pe titione r’ s im

pute d politic a l opinion wa s a re a son for the ha

rm he suffe re d. Se e Barajas-Rome ro , 846 F.3d a t 360. Pe titione r ha s sim ila rly fa ile d to show tha t he would be thre a te ne d in the future be c a use of a n im p ute d politic a l opinion. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e a lso supports the B IA’ s c onc lusion tha

t Pe titione r ha s fa ile d to show a

like lihood of future

torture c arrie d out or a c quie sc e d in by Jam a ic an offic i a ls. Pe t itione r a c knowle dge d tha t polic e shot his brothe

r be lie ving
2he wa s a

thie f, and he te s tifie d tha t his ha lf-brothe r wa s a c c i de nta lly kille d by the polic e whe n the y

we re c ha sing a fte r som e o ne e lse
. Pe titione r furthe r te stifie d tha t in m ost of his own enc o unte rs with violent a tta c ke rs he wa s una

ble to ide ntify

the pe rpe t ra t ors a nd de c line d to re p ort the e ve nts to thepolic e . Pe titione r ha s fa ile d to show tha t he would be torture d upon re turn or tha t the polic e would be “ una ble or unwilling”

to oppose any

future atta c k s. Se e Garc ia-Milian v . Holde r , 755 F.3d 1026, 1034 (9th C ir. 2014). PE T IT IO N DE NIE D.

3