Kane

Kane v. Gonzales

Good Law
204 F. App'x 633
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 7, 2006No. 04-72750California786 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Haby Kane, a Mauritanian national, petitions for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision that denied asylum, withholding of removal and relief under the United Nations Convention Against Torture (CAT). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (b) and review the BIA’s denial for substantial evidence. Where, as here, the BIA adopts the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) credibility determination, we review directly the IJ’s reasons for finding the applicant not credible. See Bandari v. INS, 227 F.3d 1160, 1165 (9th Cir.2000). We hold that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding is supported by substantial evidence and thus deny Kane’s petition for review. Because the parties are familiar with the facts we do not recite them in detail.

The IJ found Kane not to be a credible witness because Kane was evasive and unable or unwilling to answer direct questions, and because there were significant discrepancies in Kane’s accounts of the chronology, duration, motivation and severity of his arrests, all matters going to the heart of his asylum application. The IJ’s adverse credibility finding is supported by substantial evidence.

Kane presented at least four versions…

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.