Navarijo

Navarijo v. Ashcroft

Good Law
84 F. App'x 835
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 18, 2003No. 02-73202; Agency No. A70-781-338California230 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Marco Antonio Aroehe Navarijo, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions pro se for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) order denying his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review the IJ’s adverse credibility finding for substantial evidence. Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1149-50 (9th Cir.1999). We deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination because Aroehe Navarijo requested asylum on inconsistent grounds in his original asylum application, asylum interview, amended asylum application, and hearing testimony, and the discrepancies go to the heart of his asylum claim. See Valderrama v. INS, 260 F.3d 1083 , 1085 (9th Cir.2001) (per curiam).

Aroehe Navarijo’s contention that the streamlining provisions violate his right to due process is foreclosed by Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 848-52 (9th Cir. 2003).

We deny Aroehe Navarijo’s request that we remand this matter for adjustment of status. To the extent that Aroehe Navarijo requests a stay of voluntary…

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.