Singh
Singh v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Mihan Singh, a native and a citizen of India, petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), affirming the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention against Torture. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a). Because the BIA adopted and incorporated the IJ’s reasoning, we review the IJ’s decision as the final agency determination. See Hakeem v. INS, 273 F.3d 812, 816 (9th Cir.2001). We review the IJ’s adverse credibility determination under a substantial evidence standard. See Andriasian v. INS, 180 F.3d 1033, 1040 (9th Cir.1999). We deny Singh’s petition.
Substantial evidence—including Singh’s confused and contradictory testimony about the elections he participated in as a member of the Akali Dal (Mann) party—supports the IJ’s determination that Singh’s testimony lacked credibility. Although corroborative documentation is not usually required, the IJ did not err in requesting it where Singh’s credibility was already under question. See Sidhu v. *236 INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1092 (9th Cir.2000). Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s…