Mirzakhanyan

Mirzakhanyan v. Ashcroft

Good Law
114 F. App'x 854
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 9, 2004No. 03-71476; Agency No. A78-015-606California263 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Hrair Mirzakhanyan, a native and citizen of Armenia, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction *855 under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility finding because Mirzakhanyan’s testimony was internally inconsistent and was inconsistent with the affidavit accompanying his asylum application. See Malhi v. INS, 336 F.3d 989, 992-93 (9th Cir.2003). The discrepancies relate to his claim of past persecution based on his Iranian ethnicity and go to the heart of his asylum claim. See Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001).

By failing to qualify for asylum, Mirzakhanyan necessarily fails to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 961 (9th Cir.1996) (en banc). Mirzakhanyan is also not entitled to CAT relief because he did not demonstrate it is more likely than not he will be tortured if returned to Armenia. See Malhi v. INS,…

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.