Santosa

Santosa v. Ashcroft

Good Law
120 F. App'x 174
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 18, 2005No. 03-73102California254 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Budi Santosa, an ethnic Chinese and citizen of Indonesia, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming the immigration judge’s denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a). We deny the petition.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s denial of Santosa’s request for asylum because Santosa’s experiences with discrimination and witnessing anti-Chinese riots do not demonstrate that he has suffered past persecution or has a well-founded fear of future persecution if returned to Indonesia. See Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1016-18 (9th Cir.2003); cf. Sael v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 922, 927-29 (9th Cir.2004).

Because Santosa fails to satisfy the standard for asylum, he necessarily fails to satisfy the more stringent standard for withholding of removal. See Khourassany v. INS, 208 F.3d 1096, 1101 (9th Cir.2000).

Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of relief under the CAT because the record does not indicate that it is “more likely than not” that Santosa would be tortured if removed to…

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.