Case Name: Michael W. Young SANG, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-23
Citations: 699 F. App'x 677
Docket Number: No. 14-72276
Parties: Michael W. Young SANG, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
Judges: Before: FERNANDEZ, RAWLINSON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 699
Pages: 677–678

Head Matter:
Michael W. Young SANG, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.
No. 14-72276
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted October 4, 2017 Pasadena, California
Filed October 23, 2017
R. Wayne McMillan, Law Office of R. Wayne McMillan, Pasadena, CA, for Petitioner
Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, OIL, Jaelyn Elizabeth Shea, Trial Attorney, DOJ—U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Respondent
Before: FERNANDEZ, RAWLINSON, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Michael Wayne Young Sang, a native and citizen of Jamaica, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) denial of his application for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) . We deny the petition.
Young Sang argues that the BIA's determination that he was not entitled to deferral of removal is not supported .by substantial evidence. However, we must uphold the BIA's factual findings unless the record compels a contrary conclusion; See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S, 478, 481 n.1, 112 S.Ct. 812, 815 n.1, 117 L.Ed. 2d 38 (1992); Del Cid Marroquin v. Lynch, 823 F.3d 933, 937 (9th Cir. 2016) (per curiam). Young Sang would have to demonstrate "that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable fact-finder could fail to find" that it was more likely than not that he would be subjected to torture in Jamaica. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 483-84, 112 S.Ct. at 817; see also Lanza, 389 F.3d at 936.
We have carefully reviewed the record and we are satisfied that Young Sang cannot meet that standard. In order to do so he would have to show that the evidence compelled the determination that it was "more likely than not that he ., would be tortured if removed" to Jamaica. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2), 1208.17(a); see also Ahmed v. Keisler, 504 F.3d 1183, 1200 (9th Cir. 2007). That he has not done.
"Torture is an extreme form of cruel and inhuman treatment...." 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18(a)(2). The evidence here does not compel a determination that Young Sang suffered that degree of harm in the past. See Nuru v. Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1207, 1217 (9th Cir. 2005). He did show that he suffered some physical harm, but not to a degree bespeaking torture. See e.g,, Ahmed, 504 F.3d at 1200-01; Kumar v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 1043, 1047-49, 1055-56 (9th Cir. 2006). Nor does the evidence compel a determination that Young Sang would more likely than not be tortured in the future. It is not sufficient to show evidence of generalized violence and of some police brutality, and Young Sang did not establish "that [he] would face any particular threat of torture." Moreover, while the Jamaican government may not always be successful in prosecuting perpetrators of violence, that does not compel a determination that the government consents to or acquiesces in the violence. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18(a)(1); see also Del Cid Marroquin, 823 F.3d at 937.
Petition DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
.United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted Dec. 10, 1984, S. Treaty Doc. No. 100-20 (1988), 1465 U.N.T.S. 85, implemented at 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18.
. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.17(a).
. See Lanza v. Ashcroft, 389 F.3d 917, 936 (9th Cir. 2004).
. See Delgado-Ortiz v. Holder, 600 F.3d 1148, 1152 (9th Cir. 2010) (per curiam)
. See Lanza, 389 F.3d at 936,
.Dhital v. Mukasey, 532 F.3d 1044, 1051-52 (9th Cir. 2008) (per curiam).