Jerezhino Lamont v. Eric Holder, Jr.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FILED

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT JUN 06 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

JEREZHINO LAMONT, No. 10-73439

Petitioner, Agency No. A098-921-026

v.

MEMORANDUM*

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted March 13, 2012 San Francisco, California

Before: WALLACE, D.W. NELSON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

Lamont petitions for review from a decision of the Board of Immigration

Appeals (Board) affirming the immigration judge’s denial of Lamont’s application

for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT)

protection. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252, and we deny the petition

for review.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. For Lamont to be eligible for asylum, he was required to establish that he is

“a refugee,” meaning that he “is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or

unwilling to…

MEMORANDUM *

Lamont petitions for review from a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming the immigration judge’s denial of Lamont’s application for asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture (CAT) protection. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the petition for review.

*305 For Lamont to be eligible for asylum, he was required to establish that he is “a refugee,” meaning that he “is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself ... of the protection of, [Jamaica] because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158 (b)(1)(B)(i), 1101(a)(42).

The Board found that Lamont could safely relocate within Jamaica given the fact that his mother had relocated to the countryside, and Lamont cites no evidence in the record compelling a contrary result. Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734, 738 (9th Cir.2009) (Board’s factual findings may be reversed “only if the evidence in the record compels a contrary result”); Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(9)(A) (appellant’s brief must…

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent. Substantial evidence does not support the BIA’s denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and protection pursuant to the Convention Against *306 Torture (CAT). Perez-Ramirez v. Holder, 648 F.3d 963 , 956 (9th Cir.2011). I would grant the petition for review.

In applying for relief, Lamont offered credible evidence that: (1) members of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) — the rival, governing political party — accused him of being a People’s National Party (PNP) member, attacked him with machetes, shot 100 rounds of ammunition into his house, and vowed to pursue him until his death; and (2) the police refused to investigate these assaults, instead detaining and beating him until he falsely confessed to PNP gang membership. Due to the family’s support of the PNP, JLP-members also shot Lamont’s younger brother, and murdered his sleeping nephew.

Based on this evidence, a reasonable factfinder would be compelled to conclude that Lamont suffered past persecution, Cordon-Garcia v. INS, 204 F.3d 985, 991 (9th Cir.2000), and that his support of the PNP was a central reason for the violence to which he was subjected. Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734,…