Duran

Duran v. Gonzales

Good Law
204 F. App'x 655
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 14, 2006No. 05-71091California370 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Julia de Jesus Villa Duran and Nicolas Mauricio Cadin Villa are natives and citizens of Colombia. They petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision that summarily affirmed the ruling of an Immigration Judge (“IJ”) denying their application for asylum and withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 , and we deny the petition in part, grant it in part, and remand for further proceedings.

Where, as here, the BIA summarily affirmed the IJ’s opinion, this court reviews the IJ’s opinion as the final agency decision. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). This court will affirm the IJ’s decision if it is supported by reasonable evidence on the record considered as a whole, and may reverse only if the applicant shows that the evidence compels the conclusion that the asylum decision was incorrect. INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481 , 112 S.Ct. 812 , 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

Villa Duran and Cadin Villa contend that the IJ erred by denying asylum. We disagree. Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s conclusion that petitioners’ encounters with the guerrillas were not on account of a…

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.