## Facts

- Three noncitizens (Y-L-, A-G-, and R-S-R-) were ordered removed based on final convictions for felony drug-trafficking offenses in the United States.
- Y-L-, a Haitian national, was convicted in Florida of trafficking in cocaine (a first-degree felony with a potential 30-year term) and resisting an officer with violence; he received a 25-month sentence.
- A-G-, a Jamaican national, was convicted in federal court of distributing cocaine and conspiracy to distribute cocaine under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846.
- Each respondent sought protection from removal, including statutory withholding of removal and deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
- Y-L- claimed he feared torture in Haiti connected to a death squad that had killed members of his family.
- A-G- claimed he feared torture in Jamaica in retaliation for cooperating with U.S. law enforcement against a cocaine supplier.
- In separate decisions, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) concluded the respondents’ drug-trafficking aggravated felonies were not “particularly serious crimes” and granted withholding of removal.
- The Attorney General certified the cases for review and decided them in a consolidated precedential opinion, reviewing the matters de novo.

## Issues

1. Whether aggravated felonies involving unlawful trafficking in controlled substances are presumptively “particularly serious crimes” that bar withholding of removal under INA § 241(b)(3)(B).
2. Whether the respondents qualified for CAT deferral where they did not establish that the feared torture would be inflicted by, or with the consent or acquiescence of, a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.

## Decision

- The Attorney General reversed the BIA’s grants of withholding of removal.
- The Attorney General held that aggravated felonies involving unlawful drug trafficking presumptively constitute “particularly serious crimes” for withholding purposes.
- The Attorney General overruled prior BIA precedent to the extent it treated drug-trafficking aggravated felonies as not necessarily particularly serious.
- Because a particularly serious crime conviction renders the respondent a danger to the community, the respondents were held statutorily ineligible for withholding of removal.
- The Attorney General denied CAT deferral because each respondent failed to show the feared torture would occur with official involvement, consent, or acquiescence.

## Legal Principles

- For withholding of removal under INA § 241(b)(3)(B), aggravated felonies involving unlawful trafficking in controlled substances are presumptively “particularly serious crimes.”
- Departure from the presumption is permitted only in the most extenuating circumstances that are both extraordinary and compelling.
- A noncitizen convicted of a particularly serious crime is considered a danger to the community and is barred from withholding of removal.
- CAT deferral requires proof that it is more likely than not the applicant would be tortured by, at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official (including willful blindness in the sense recognized by governing standards), not merely by private actors.
- Evidence of severe private retaliation, without a sufficient showing of government participation or acquiescence, is inadequate for CAT deferral.

## Conclusion

The Attorney General established a strong presumption that drug-trafficking aggravated felonies are particularly serious crimes barring withholding of removal and denied CAT deferral where the respondents did not prove that any feared torture would occur with the requisite official involvement or acquiescence.


Matter of Y-L-, A-G-, & R-S-R-, 23 I. & N. Dec. 270 (A.G. 2002)