Rauf

Rauf v. Ashcroft

Good Law
114 F. App'x 898
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 10, 2004No. 02-72625; Agency No. A75-320-086California277 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Hanif Mohammed Mohammed Rauf, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) summary affirmance of an immigration judge’s (“U”) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review for substantial evidence, Gormley v. Ashcroft, 364 F.3d 1172, 1176 (9th Cir.2004), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s adverse credibility finding because some of the inconsistencies in Raufs testimony regarding whether his mother paid a bribe to Indian police for Raufs release, and where he was attacked go to the heart of his asylum claim. See Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001) (noting that even one material inconsistency is sufficient to support an adverse credibility determination).

In the absence of credible testimony, Rauf failed to establish eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal. See Alvarez-Santos v. INS, 332 F.3d 1245, 1254-55 (9th Cir.2003).

Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s conclusion that Rauf is not entitled to relief under the…

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.