Gill

Gill v. Mukasey

Good Law
265 F. App'x 498
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 24, 2008No. 04-73799California1,071 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

The evidence compels a finding that the IJ’s adverse credibility determination was not based on substantial evidence. 1 Here, the IJ based his credibility determination on four factors: (1) the discrepancy between Gill’s testimony and his father’s affidavit about the political affiliation of Gill’s two cousins, (2) the discrepancy over whether the photographs of Gill introduced were taken in California or Washington, (3) Gill’s inability to identify who signed the All India Sikh Student Federation letter, and (4) Gill’s inability to recall his father’s exact age. Each of these reasons either inaccurately reflect the record or have no bearing on Gill’s credibility.

The IJ claimed that Gill was silent when asked about the discrepancy between Gill’s testimony and his father’s affidavit regarding the political affiliation of Gill’s two cousins. The record reflects that Gill actually stated that the discrepancy may have been due to clerical error, or that his cousins may have been a member of two parties, Akali Dal Mann and All India Sikh Student Federation, at the same time. The dissent incorrectly claims that Gill was “absolutely silent” when asked how often…

dissent Opinion

Rawlinson, J.

dissenting:

I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) adverse credibility determination was not supported by substantial evidence. I simply cannot agree that the record compels a finding of credibility. See Lolong v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 1173, 1178 (9th Cir.2007) (en banc) (requiring affirmance unless “the evidence not only supports, but compels” reversal citation omitted).

As we have repeatedly held, if any one of the bases for the adverse credibility determination is supported by substantial evidence, the adverse credibility finding must be sustained. See Chebchoub v. 1. N.S., 257 F.3d 1038, 1043 (9th Cir.2001). In this case, at least three of the adverse credibility determinations are supported by substantial evidence.

Gill testified that he was a member of the All-India Sikh Students Federation. As proof of his membership, Gill submitted a document that he represented was signed by the Federation’s president. When asked whether he knew the president, Gill recanted his testimony that the document was signed by the president and stated that it was signed by the president’s secretary. Although it was not important whether the…

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.