Rojas

Rojas v. Ashcroft

Good Law
103 F. App'x 301
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 19, 2004No. 02-72008California306 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Jorge Luis Rojas, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) summarily affirming an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of deportation. Because the transitional rules apply, Kalaw v. INS, 133 F.3d 1147, 1150 (9th Cir. 1997), we have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s determination that Rojas’s subjective fear of future persecution is not well-founded because he can safely relocate within Peru. Cf. Melkonian v. Ashcroft, 320 F.3d 1061, 1069 (9th Cir.2003). Moreover, Rojas’s subjective fear is unreasonable in light of changed country conditions. See Gonzalez-Hernandez v. Ashcroft, 336 F.3d 995, 1000-01 (9th Cir.2003). Accordingly, Rojas failed to establish eligibility for asylum or withholding of deportation. See AlHarbi v. INS, 242 F.3d 882, 888-89 (9th Cir .2001).

Rojas’s contention that the BIA’s streamlining decision denied him due process is foreclosed by Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849-52 (9th Cir. 2003). We need not consider separately whether the BIA…

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.