Hosepo

Hosepo v. Keisler

Good Law
249 F. App'x 619
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 1, 2007No. 04-72304California352 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Edmond Hosepo petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) dismissal of his appeal of an immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). We deny the petition.

We lack jurisdiction to review the IJ’s determination of a question of fact that petitioner is statutorily ineligible for asylum based on the one-year time bar. See Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646, 650 (9th Cir.2007). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 over petitioner’s remaining claims.

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s credibility finding. The IJ did not err in noting Hosepo’s failure to provide corroborating evidence. In cases such as this one, “where the IJ has reason to question the applicant’s credibility, and the applicant fails to produce non-duplicative, material, easily available corroborating evidence and *621 provides no credible explanation for such failure, an adverse credibility finding will withstand appellate review.” Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1092 (9th Cir.2000). While discussing the adverse credibility determination, the IJ properly addressed Hosepo’s…

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.