Diaz-Juarez
Diaz-Juarez v. Ashcroft
Opinion
Lead Opinion
*286 MEMORANDUM ***
In this petition for review, petitioners Jaime Diaz-Juarez and Maria Isela Diaz-Gonzalez attack the Board of Immigration Appeals’ determination that they lacked good moral character — and were thus statutorily ineligible for suspension of deportation — because they had given false testimony for the purpose of receiving immigration benefits. See 8 U.S.C. § 1101 (f)(6). None of petitioners’ arguments are persuasive.
Petitioners argue that “concealment” may not support a finding of false testimony, and that petitioners had no subjective intent to lie for the purpose of obtaining benefits. However, substantial evidence supports the BIA’s findings that petitioners’ statements were affirmatively false, and that, under the circumstances, it was reasonable to infer that petitioners intended to deceive the immigration judge in order to obtain a favorable ruling on their application for suspension of deportation. Although petitioners make plausible claims that the BIA could have reached a contrary result on the evidence before it, they shall not prevail, because a reasonable fact-finder would not have been compelled to find in their favor. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias,…