In re J-C-H-F

29 Cited authorities

Shrestha v. Holder
590 F.3d 1034 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 1,760 times
Holding that adverse credibility determinations must be based on "specific and cogent reasons" supported by "specific instances in the record that support a conclusion that the factor undermines credibility."
Ramsameachire v. Ashcroft
357 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2004) Cited 872 times
Holding that "materially different accounts" of past persecution "may render the alien's testimony incredible"
Chun He Li v. Ashcroft
378 F.3d 959 (9th Cir. 2004) Cited 716 times
Holding substantial evidence supported adverse credibility finding based on material discrepancies between airport interview and in-court testimony
Zheng v. Ashcroft
332 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 410 times
Holding that to qualify for protection under the Convention Against Torture, an alien must show that he will more likely than not be tortured in his home country if removed
Don v. Gonzales
476 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 278 times
Holding that petitioner's behavior undermined his stated fear of persecution
Rivera v. Mukasey
508 F.3d 1271 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 245 times
Holding that "inconsistent testimony regarding the details of her abduction . . . go[es] to the heart of her claim"
Espinoza v. I.N.S.
45 F.3d 308 (9th Cir. 1995) Cited 216 times
Holding that an I-213 is presumed to be reliable
Singh v. Gonzales
403 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2005) Cited 154 times
Holding that certain features of an asylum interview, such as whether it was administered under oath and in the native language, can make the interview unreliable for purposes of a credibility determination
Tang v. U.S. Attorney General
578 F.3d 1270 (11th Cir. 2009) Cited 118 times
Concluding the petitioners had no constitutionally protected liberty interest in the admission of evidence after the court-ordered deadline, as the IJ had the discretion to exclude evidence submitted after the deadline
Balasubramanrim v. Immigration and Natural
143 F.3d 157 (3d Cir. 1998) Cited 160 times
Holding that inconsistencies between hearing testimony and an airport statement are not sufficient, standing alone, to support an adverse credibility determination
Section 1158 - Asylum
8 U.S.C. § 1158 Cited 10,655 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding a "pattern or practice" of persecution requires it be "systemic, pervasive, or organized"
Section 1208.2 - Jurisdiction
8 C.F.R. § 1208.2 Cited 77 times 1 Legal Analyses
Limiting withholding proceedings to a determination of eligibility for "withholding or deferral of removal," and noting that all parties are barred from "raising or considering any other issues"

In re J-C-H-F

29 Cited authorities

Holding that adverse credibility determinations must be based on "specific and cogent reasons" supported by "specific instances in the record that support a conclusion that the factor undermines credibility."

Holding that "materially different accounts" of past persecution "may render the alien's testimony incredible"

Holding substantial evidence supported adverse credibility finding based on material discrepancies between airport interview and in-court testimony

Holding that to qualify for protection under the Convention Against Torture, an alien must show that he will more likely than not be tortured in his home country if removed

Holding that petitioner's behavior undermined his stated fear of persecution

Holding that "inconsistent testimony regarding the details of her abduction . . . go[es] to the heart of her claim"

Holding that an I-213 is presumed to be reliable

Holding that certain features of an asylum interview, such as whether it was administered under oath and in the native language, can make the interview unreliable for purposes of a credibility determination

Concluding the petitioners had no constitutionally protected liberty interest in the admission of evidence after the court-ordered deadline, as the IJ had the discretion to exclude evidence submitted after the deadline

Holding that inconsistencies between hearing testimony and an airport statement are not sufficient, standing alone, to support an adverse credibility determination

Holding a "pattern or practice" of persecution requires it be "systemic, pervasive, or organized"

Limiting withholding proceedings to a determination of eligibility for "withholding or deferral of removal," and noting that all parties are barred from "raising or considering any other issues"