Hampaul

Hampaul v. Ashcroft

Good Law
112 F. App'x 628
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 4, 2004No. 03-70696California652 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Yash Paul Hampaul petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the ruling of the Immigration Judge (“IJ”) that, because his testimony was not credible, Hampaul was not eligible for asylum or voluntary departure. Because the credibility finding is not based on substantial evidence, we reverse and remand.

The BIA adopted the IJ’s credibility determination. We therefore “look through the BIA’s decision to examine the IJ’s reasons for deeming the person not credible.” Bandari v. INS, 227 F.3d 1160, 1165 (9th Cir.2000). The credibility finding must be based on substantial evidence, made on an individualized basis, and supported by specific reasons for disbelieving Hampaul’s testimony. See id. “Speculation and conjecture cannot form the basis of an adverse credibility finding.” Ge v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 1121, 1124 (9th Cir.2004) (quotations omitted). Hampaul testified through an interpreter, and “asylum hearings frequently generate mistranslations and miscommunications.” Bandari, 227 F.3d at 1166 (quotations omitted).

The IJ characterized Hampaul as “extremely vague” about which academic subjects he taught. This characterization…

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.