Carrasco-Humanani

Carrasco-Humanani v. Immigration & Naturalization Service

Good Law
18 F. App'x 607
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 5, 2001No. 98-70178; I & NS No. A70-635-654California989 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Arturo Carraseo-Humanani appeals the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) denying his petition for asylum. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a), as amended by § 309(c)(4) of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996. Because the BIA’s decision, including its adverse credibility finding, was supported by sub *608 stantial evidence, we affirm. We also reject Carrasco-Humanani’s contention that the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denied him due process.

DISCUSSION

Because the facts are familiar to the parties, we do not repeat them here unless necessary to explain our decision. We review the BIA’s determination that an alien is not eligible for asylum under the substantial evidence standard. See Rivera-Moreno v. INS, 213 F.3d 481, 485 (9th Cir.2000). This standard is extremely deferential, and requires us to affirm unless we determine that “the evidence [the alien] presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 484 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Pure questions of law, such as whether an alien has been…

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.