Gambino
Gambino v. Holder
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Based on a thorough and careful analysis of the evidence, the immigration judge (IJ) granted Gambino’s petition for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), finding it more likely than not that Gambino would be tortured, as defined in 8 C.F.R. 1208.18(a)(1) if he were removed to Italy. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) reversed. In an opinion independently analyzing the record and relevant case law, the BIA concluded that Gambino failed to carry his burden of establishing that it is more likely than not that he will be tortured if returned to Italy.
Reviewing the evidence in the record as a whole, we cannot say we are compelled to hold that it is more likely than not that Gambino wiil be tortured if he is returned to Italy. See Morales v. Gonzales, 478 F.3d 972, 977 (9th Cir.2007). To constitute torture, severe pain must be inflicted on a person for some proscribed purpose and with the specific intent to cause pain or suffering. See Villegas v. Mukasey, 523 F.3d 984, 988-89 (9th Cir.2008); Nuru v. *849 Gonzales, 404 F.3d 1207, 1217 (9th Cir.2005); see also 8 C.F.R. § 1208.18 .