Jamal Ali Farah v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General

Good Law
348 F.3d 1153·2003 WL 22682434·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9823·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 23239
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 14, 200302-70252California2,337 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schroeder, J.

Petitioner, Jamal Ali Farah, petitions for review of the BIA’s decision denying his application for asylum and adopting the opinion of the immigration judge (“IJ”). The IJ had ordered Farah removed on the basis of the finding that Farah was not credible and had further ordered Farah permanently ineligible for any benefits under the immigration laws of the United States because his application was frivolous. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (d)(6).

In this petition for review, Farah first challenges the IJ’s credibility determination underlying his removal order. Farah, however, bears a heavy burden, for he is required to establish that the evidence was so compelling that this court must find it worthy of credence and must order him eligible for asylum relief. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). Farah has not borne this burden.

Farah also challenges the IJ’s finding that he knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application. Such a finding carries the severe penalty of a permanent bar to immigration relief, so, INS regulations require there to be sufficient opportunity to account for discrepancies or implausibilities. 8 C.F.R. § 208.20 . Our…

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.