Mohamad Ahsanul Hoque Morsheda Hoque v. John Ashcroft, Attorney General

Bad Law
367 F.3d 1190·2004 WL 1109469·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 9712
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 19, 200402-72404California3,522 words

Opinion

Opinion

Beezer, J.

Petitioner Mohamad Ahsanul Hoque (“Ahsanul”) and his wife, Morsheda Hoque (“Morsheda”), whose claims derive from his, petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) dismissing without opinion their appeal from a decision of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying their application for asylum and withholding of removal. The Hoques contend that the IJ and BIA erred in finding their testimony incredible, in determining that they were not persecuted on account of any of the grounds enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act (“Act”), and in determining that they faced valid prosecution rather than political persecution if removed to Bangladesh. The Hoques claim that Ahsanul was persecuted by members of a political group that the Bangladeshi government was unable to control because of his political beliefs and activity in support of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (“BNP”).

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we grant the petition for review. We hold that the IJ’s adverse credibility determination is not supported by substantial evidence. The IJ’s findings of fact underlying the additional bases for denying asylum — that Ahsanul was…

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.