Gonzalez

Gonzalez v. Immigration & Naturalization Services

Good Law
82 F.3d 903·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 10180·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3120
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 3, 1996No. 94-70881California4,573 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

In this asylum case, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) erred regarding Rosaura Gonzalez Gallegos’s petition by taking administrative notice of the effect of political changes in petitioner’s country after she left, without giving her a fair opportunity to be heard. We, therefore, grant Gallegos’s petition for review and remand the ease. We deny Jeaneth Catuse’s petition for review.

FACTS

The petitioners are a mother, Mrs. Gallegos, and her adult daughter, Ms. Catase, both citizens of Nicaragua. Both petition for review of the BIA’s denial of their separate asylum claims, based on fear of persecution by the Sandinistas. The daughter entered the United States almost three years later than the mother, and their histories in Nicaragua are different, so we set out the facts separately. The Immigration Judge (IJ) made an express finding that both petitioners’ testimony was “at all times truthful, candid, and forthright,” and the BIA made *906 no express finding on credibility, so we accept as undisputed the facts as testified to by the petitioners. Singh v. Ilchert, 63 F.3d 1501, 1506 (9th Cir.1995).

The asylum hearing was held April 27, 1990. The date is significant because…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.