Sandhu
Sandhu v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Ranjit Singh Sandhu, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision dismissing his appeal of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence an adverse credibility finding and a denial of asylum and will uphold the IJ’s decision unless the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 992-93 (9th Cir.2003). We review de novo constitutional due process challenges. Sanchez-Cruz v. INS, 255 F.3d 775, 779 (9th Cir.2001). We deny the petition in part and dismiss it in part.
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because Sandhu’s testimony was both internally inconsistent and inconsistent with his application. See Malhi, 336 F.3d at 992-93 . Because the factual discrepancies went to the heart of his asylum claim, substantial evidence supports the denial of asylum. See id.
It follows that Sandhu did not satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir.2000).