Miranda-Zapata

Miranda-Zapata v. Ashcroft

Good Law
106 F. App'x 624
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 13, 2004No. 03-70492, A77-796-319California234 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Carlos Aníbal Miranda-Zapata appeals the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA’s”) streamlined affirmance of the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ’s”) denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that Miranda-Zapata failed to demonstrate by “credible, direct, and specific evidence” that he has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of one of the protected grounds. See Singh v. INS, 134 F.3d 962, 966 (9th Cir.1998) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (a)(42)(A). Miranda-Zapata’s testimony was so vague and inconclusive that we cannot say that no reasonable “factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zaca-rias, 502 U.S. 478, 484 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

We deny Miranda-Zapata’s withholding of removal claim because failure to meet the standard for asylum necessarily precludes him from obtaining the relief of withholding of removal. See Ghaly v. INS, 58 F.3d 1425, 1429 (9th Cir.1995). We deny Miranda-Zapata’s due process claims regarding the BIA’s…

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.