Gonzalez-Pineda

Gonzalez-Pineda v. Ashcroft

Good Law
109 F. App'x 914
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 22, 2004No. 03-71124; Agency No. A77-849-351California581 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Miriam Jannet Gonzalez-Pineda, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions *915 for review of the denial by the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) of her claims for asylum and withholding of removal. We lack jurisdiction to review the BIA’s determination that Gonzalez-Pindea is ineligible for asylum because she failed to apply within one year of arriving in the United States. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3); Hakeem v. INS, 273 F.3d 812, 815 (9th Cir.2001). Under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , we have jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of withholding of removal. We review for substantial evidence, see id. at 816 , and we dismiss the petition in part, and grant it in part.

Gonzalez-Pineda must show that the evidence would compel a reasonable factfinder to conclude that she would more likely than not be persecuted on account of a political opinion or imputed political opinion if she were removed to Guatemala. See Hakeem, 273 F.3d at 816 . Gonzalez-Pineda need not provide direct evidence that her persecutors were motivated by political opinion, but need only introduce “some” evidence of the persecutor’s motive, direct or circumstantial. See Navas v. INS, 217 F.3d 646, 656-57…

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.