Lopez-Alvarado

Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft

Good Law
371 F.3d 1111·2004 WL 1326295·64 Fed. R. Serv. 801·2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 11677
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 15, 2004No. 02-74204California3,183 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McKeown, J.

We reaffirm here the principle that “the time element of an alien’s residency ... may be shown by credible direct testimony or written declarations.” Vera-Villegas v. INS, 330 F.3d 1222, 1225 (9th Cir.2003). To qualify for the discretionary relief of cancellation of removal, an alien must, as a threshold matter, have been physically present in the United States for a continuous period of no less than ten years immediately preceding the date of the application. 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(l). In denying the Lopezes’ application for cancellation of removal, the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) improperly required documentary evidence, despite substantial evidence supporting continuous presence and the lack of an *1114 adverse credibility finding. Because the IJ did not advance legitimate reasons for rejecting the testimony, the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) erred in affirming the IJ’s decision. We therefore grant the petition for review and remand for consideration of the discretionary determinations of extreme hardship and moral character.

Background

In 1997, Hugo Lopez-Alvarado, a native and citizen of Guatemala, along with his wife Maria Lizardo de Lopez and son Hugo, 1 natives and…

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.