Case Name: Donald GORDON, a/k/a Michael Coke, a/k/a Peter Gordon, a/k/a Timothy Knox, a/k/a Donald Wilson, a/k/a Donald Gordan, a/k/a Tim Knox, a/k/a Ronald Tait, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-11-09
Citations: 700 F. App'x 310
Docket Number: No. 17-1750
Parties: Donald GORDON, a/k/a Michael Coke, a/k/a Peter Gordon, a/k/a Timothy Knox, a/k/a Donald Wilson, a/k/a Donald Gordan, a/k/a Tim Knox, a/k/a Ronald Tait, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 700
Pages: 310–311

Head Matter:
Donald GORDON, a/k/a Michael Coke, a/k/a Peter Gordon, a/k/a Timothy Knox, a/k/a Donald Wilson, a/k/a Donald Gordan, a/k/a Tim Knox, a/k/a Ronald Tait, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 17-1750
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: October 30, 2017
Decided: November 9, 2017
Donald Gordon, Petitioner Pro Se. Elizabeth Fitzgerald-Sambou, Bernard Arthur Joseph, UNITED STATES DEPART MENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Donald Gordon, a native and citizen of Jamaica, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissing his appeal of the Immigration Judge's denial of his requests for withholding of removal and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have thoroughly .reviewed the record, including the transcript of Gordon's merits hearing and all supporting evidence. We conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the agency's factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B) (2012), and that substantial evidence supports the agency's decision, INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct. 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).
Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. See In re Gordon (B.I.A. May 31, 2017). We deny Gordon's motion to appoint counsel and dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
PETITION DENIED