Seniaray

Seniaray v. Ashcroft

Good Law
72 F. App'x 556
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 24, 2003No. 02-72635California366 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Harpal Singh Seniaray petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), affirming an Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of deportation, and denying his motion to remand and reopen pursuant to the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). We deny the petition.

We review for substantial evidence an adverse credibility finding and a denial of asylum and we uphold these determinations unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244, 45 (9th Cir.2000).

Substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility finding because Seniaray provided information in his asylum application that was inconsistent with his hearing testimony. See Lata, 204 F.3d at 1245 (upholding adverse credibility determination because petitioner’s explanation of discrepancies between asylum application and hearing testimony did not “compelí ] the opposite result”). For example, in his asylum application, he claimed that the police visited his home many times between his first arrest in 1986 and his *558 departure for New Zealand in 1989; at his…

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.