Emir Lenjinac v. Eric Holder, Jr., 780 F.3d 852

Lenjinac, a Bosnian Muslim born in 1987, fled Bosnia-Herzegovina after wartime atrocities (family members disappeared in Srebrenica massacre) and became a U.S. lawful permanent resident in 2005.
In 2010 he pleaded guilty to dealing cocaine in Indiana; the government charged him as removable as an aggravated felon under 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).
He conceded removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT); only the CAT claim was considered because his aggravated-felon status barred asylum/withholding.
At immigration hearings Lenjinac and family members testified he feared imprisonment and torture if returned to Bosnia due to past ethnic-targeted violence, lack of family/home there, and reports of abusive prison conditions.
The IJ granted CAT deferral, finding it more likely than not he would be tortured; the BIA accepted factual findings but vacated the grant, concluding Lenjinac failed to show he would likely be specifically targeted for torture in Bosnia or imprisoned to cause pain.
Lenjinac appealed, arguing the BIA applied the wrong legal standard and, alternatively, that its denial was not supported by substantial evidence; the Seventh Circuit reviewed de novo the legal-standard issue and for substantial evidence on the factual determination.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether BIA misstated CAT burden (legal standard)	BIA required proof that authorities would imprison him to inflict pain, mis-stating required showing	BIA applied proper CAT standard requiring likelihood of torture and that mere prison conditions are insufficient	Court: BIA applied correct standard; plaintiff’s reading too narrow
Whether substantial evidence supports BIA’s denial of CAT deferral	Evidence of likely detention + reports of torture/prison abuses make torture more likely than not	Reports of general torture/prison conditions without evidence plaintiff would be targeted are insufficient	Court: Substantial evidence supports BIA; record does not compel contrary conclusion

Abdoulaye v. Holder, 721 F.3d 485 (7th Cir. 2013) (explains need to show likely targeting in prison or intent of conditions to inflict severe pain for CAT relief)
Ward v. Holder, 632 F.3d 395 (7th Cir. 2011) (standard of review for legal questions in immigration cases)
Wanjiru v. Holder, 705 F.3d 258 (7th Cir. 2013) (deferral of removal is reviewable and not a final remedy barred from judicial review)
Pavlyk v. Gonzalez, 469 F.3d 1082 (7th Cir. 2006) (articulating substantial-evidence standard for reviewing BIA factual findings)
Rashiah v. Ashcroft, 388 F.3d 1126 (7th Cir. 2004) (evidence of general torture in country insufficient without showing the applicant would be personally targeted)
Selimi v. Ashcroft, 360 F.3d 736 (7th Cir. 2004) (political turmoil and human rights abuses alone do not meet higher CAT standard requiring individualized risk)