NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________ No. 17-3329 ____________ OMARLEY CURNANDY HUDSON, AKA Hudson O'Maley, AKA Shelby Clark, AKA Stephen Young, AKA Shelby Hernandez Clark, Petitioner v. ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent ____________ On Petition for Review from an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Agency No. A209-308-350) Immigration Judge: Walter A. Durling ____________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) October 2, 2018 Before: SHWARTZ, ROTH and FISHER, Circuit Judges. (Filed: February 7, 2019) ____________ OPINION* ____________ FISHER, Circuit Judge. * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. Omarley Hudson petitions for review of a final order of removal. To the extent that Hudson argues that the Board of Immigration Appeals applied an incorrect standard of review, we will deny his petition. We will dismiss the remainder of the petition for lack of jurisdiction. I. Hudson is a native and citizen of Jamaica. He grew up in a Kingston neighborhood that was heavily influenced by competing political parties: the People’s National Party and the Jamaica Labor Party. His mother supported the People’s National Party in exchange for financial and other support. The parties exercised influence and control within Hudson’s neighborhood. Residents avoided opposition areas for fear of physical violence. On one occasion, Hudson was beaten with bats and cut with a knife when he walked home from school in the rival party area. Several of his friends lost their lives at the hands of the political parties. Around age thirteen, Hudson began assisting the People’s National Party. Twice, he was given a gun and instructed to convince reluctant voters to vote for the party. When he was about sixteen years old, he was pressured to contribute more and prove himself by murdering his neighbor, a rival party member. Instead, Hudson fled to the United States in 2002. He overstayed his visitor’s visa and has remained in the United States, accruing convictions for drug and firearm offenses. 2 In 2017, Hudson was ordered to be removed because of his aggravated felony convictions.1 He expressed a reasonable fear of returning to Jamaica and was ultimately referred to an Immigration Judge (IJ) for withholding proceedings.2 He applied for protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), testifying that his “cousin informed him before he left Jamaica that he was considered a snitch” and that “the enforcement arm” of the party was “looking for him.”3 The IJ denied his application for CAT protection, finding that although he did not lack credibility, there is no evidence that anyone in Jamaica is currently looking for him, or that the government would acquiesce to any torture of Hudson. The IJ found that these fears were not objectively corroborated. The BIA affirmed. It ruled that the IJ did not clearly err and that Hudson’s “speculation as to future harm is insufficient to meet his burden of proof.”4 II. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(1).5 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals