Meli

Meli v. Mukasey

Good Law
254 F. App'x 685
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 20, 2007No. 03-73165California372 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Meli, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision that summarily affirmed the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”) order denying her application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 .

When, as here, the BIA affirms without an opinion, we review directly the IJ’s decision. See Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 845, 849 (9th Cir.2003). We review for substantial evidence, Sael v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 922, 924 (9th Cir.2004), and we deny the petition.

We conclude that the BIA did not violate Meli’s due process rights by issuing a streamlined decision without an opinion. See Falcon Carriche, 350 F.3d at 850-53 . We further conclude that Meli’s contention that the IJ violated her due process rights by interrupting her testimony is unpersuasive because Meli has failed to demonstrate any prejudice resulting from the alleged violation. See Campos-Sanchez v. INS, 164 F.3d 448, 450 (9th Cir.1999).

Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s finding that the harm Meli suffered did not rise to the level of past persecution.…

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.