Veloso

Veloso v. Mukasey

Good Law
258 F. App'x 967
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 11, 2007No. 04-75355California520 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Veloso petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision to deny his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Veloso alleges that in 1999, he witnessed a murder committed by a police officer in Goiana, Brazil, and was subsequently intimidated and harassed on multiple occasions by the police officer and his confederates. He entered *969 the United States on a tourist visa on May 30, 1999, and filed for asylum and other relief on September 10, 2001.

We must first decide whether 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3) bars us from reviewing the BIA’s “extraordinary circumstances” determination. We have jurisdiction to determine whether jurisdiction exists. Flores-Miramontes v. INS, 212 F.3d 1133, 1135 (9th Cir.2000). In addition, notwithstanding the jurisdictional bar posed by 8 U.S.C. § 1158 (a)(3), we have jurisdiction to review “constitutional claims or questions of law.” 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a)(2)(D). In Ramadan v. Gonzales, 479 F.3d 646 (9th Cir.) (per curiam), reh’g en banc denied, 504 F.3d 973 (9th Cir.2007), we held that we could review mixed questions of law and fact in which “ ‘the historical facts are…

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.