Phaga

Phaga v. Gonzales

Good Law
167 F. App'x 621
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 16, 2006No. 04-72228California359 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

*622 MEMORANDUM **

Aung San Naw Phaga, a native and citizen of Burma, petitions for review of the Board of Immigrations Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). To the extent we have jurisdiction, it is conferred by 8 U.S.C. § 1252 . We review an adverse credibility determination for substantial evidence, Chebchoub v. INS, 257 F.3d 1038, 1042 (9th Cir.2001), and we dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review.

We lack jurisdiction to review the agency’s determination that Phaga failed to file his application for asylum within one year of his arrival in the United States. See 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3); Ramadan v. Gonzales, 427 F.3d 1218, 1221-22 (9th Cir.2005).

Phaga admitted that he lied, both on his application and at his removal hearing, about his date of entry, his manner of entry and his reasons for entry. He also admitted lying about his criminal record in the United States. Phaga did not make these admissions until the government presented evidence that contradicted his account. Substantial evidence therefore…

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.