Cifuentes-Villatoro
Cifuentes-Villatoro v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Alvaro Rodrigo Cifuentes-Villatoro, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision dismissing his appeal of the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the petition.
We review the BIA’s determination that an applicant has not proven eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal for substantial evidence. Cardenas v. INS, 294 F.3d 1062, 1065 (9th Cir.2002); MolinaEstrada v. INS, 293 F.3d 1089, 1093 (9th Cir.2002). Therefore, we must uphold its decision unless Cifuentes-Villatoro shows that the evidence not only supports reversal, but compels it. Pedro-Mateo v. INS, 224 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir.2000) (quoting INS v. Elias-Zaearias, 502 U.S. 478 , 481 n. 1, 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992)).
The Attorney General has discretion to grant asylum to individuals who are unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin “because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political…
Dissenting Opinion
Ferguson, J.
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. The majority holds that Alvaro Rodrigo “Cifuentes-Villatoro has not adduced 'credible, direct, *752 and specific evidence in the record of facts that would support a reasonable fear of persecution.’ ” Maj. Op. at-(quoting Duarte de Guinac v. INS, 179 F.3d 1156, 1159 (9th Cir.1999)). I disagree. The evidence that Cifuentes-Villatoro proffered is sufficient to find that his fear of persecution if returned to Guatemala is objectively reasonable. See id.
First, it is important to note that the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) found Cifuentes-Villatoro credible and accepted his testimony, notwithstanding any inconsistencies that there may have been. In other words, the IJ believed Cifuentes-Villatoro was telling the truth about his harassment by the guerrillas. “Because the immigration judge is in the best position to evaluate an alien’s testimony, his or her credibility determinations are to be given ‘much weight.’” Estrada v. INS, 775 F.2d 1018, 1021 (9th Cir.1985) (quoting Phinpathya v. INS, 673 F.2d 1013, 1019 (9th Cir.1981), rev’d on other grounds, 464 U.S. 183 , 104 S.Ct. 584 , 78 L.Ed.2d 401 (1984)).