Hats off to Cleveland attorney Anna Markovich, who represented the respondent pro bono at the BIA and as amicus curiae on remand. - "Upon a thorough evaluation of all the evidence and after very careful consideration of the BIA remand Order, the Court concludes that the respondent has met his burden of proof for deferral of removal under the CAT. ... respondent has met his burden to show that the evidence establishes that the long-term use of physical restraints and psychotropic drugs constitutes torture in his case. Furthermore, the Court finds that torture is probable. ... the use of physical restraints and psychotropic drugs is widespread in Mexican mental institutions, especially in the cases of patients who are self-abusive like the respondent. Therefore, the Court finds that the respondent has met his burden to show that it is more likely than not that the respondent would be subject to these treatments that constitute torture if returned to Mexico. Accordingly, the respondent is entitled to deferral of removal pursuant to the Convention against Torture." - Matter of X-, Apr. 22, 2013.