Xea

Xea v. Ashcroft

Good Law
46 F. App'x 555
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 19, 2002No. 01-71833; INS No. A76-279-674California253 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Zhun Zhong Xea, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) dismissal of his appeal from an immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal, and his claim for relief under Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture (“Convention Against Torture”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review the BIA’s credibility findings for substan-, *556 tial evidence and uphold an adverse credibility finding unless the evidence compels a contrary result. Singh-Kawr v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1149-50 (9th Cir.1999). We deny the petition.

The inconsistencies in the record go to the heart of Xea’s asylum claim. See Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001). The BIA’s adverse credibility determination and its conclusion that Xea is ineligible for asylum is therefore supported by substantial evidence. See id.

In failing to qualify for asylum, Xea necessarily failed to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Ghaly v. INS, 58 F.3d 1425, 1429 (9th Cir.1995).

Because Xea did not present evidence establishing that it is “more likely than…

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.