Singh
Singh v. Mukasey
Opinion
lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Varinder Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of an order of *437 the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) summarily affirming a denial of his application for asylum and withholding of removal. 1 The Immigration Judge (IJ) denied the application based on a finding that Singh’s arrests and beatings at the hands of police were not on account of an imputed “political ground or a political theology.” We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(1), and we grant the petition for review.
Where, as here, the BIA affirms an IJ’s decision without opinion, we treat the IJ’s decision as the final agency determination. Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). The IJ’s factual findings regarding eligibility for asylum are reviewed for substantial evidence. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). To prevail, the applicant must show that the evidence not only supports, but compels, the conclusion that the asylum decision was incorrect. Cordon-Garcia v. INS, 204 F.3d 985, 990 (9th Cir.2000).
As an initial matter, government counsel stated before the IJ that she “would stipulate that [Singh] is…