U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2024

Xavier Williams v. Merrick Garland

Xavier Williams v. Merrick Garland
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided May 17, 2024

Xavier Williams v. Merrick Garland

Opinion

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1706 Doc: 38 Filed: 05/17/2024 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-1706

XAVIER ALEXANDER MELVILLE WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General, Respondent.

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

Submitted: April 30, 2024 Decided: May 17, 2024

Before GREGORY, QUATTLEBAUM, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Eric M. Mark, LAW OFFICE OF ERIC M. MARK, Newark, New Jersey, for Petitioner. Brian M. Boynton, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Anthony P. Nicastro, Assistant Director, Joanna L. Watson, Senior Trial Counsel, Office of Immigration Litigation, Civil Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1706 Doc: 38 Filed: 05/17/2024 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Xavier Alexander Melville Williams, a native and citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. We deny the petition for review.

We have thoroughly reviewed the record, including the transcript of Williams’ merits hearing and all supporting evidence. We conclude that the record evidence does not compel a ruling contrary to any of the agency’s factual findings, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(4)(B), and that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision, Nasrallah v. Barr, 590 U.S. 573, 584 (2020) (stating standard of review).

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.