Fensong Zhu v. Holder

331 F. App'x 500
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided May 29, 2009·No. No. 05-72337·Published

Opinions

MEMORANDUM *

Fensong Zhu petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s denial of his requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We review the IJ’s credibility findings for substantial evidence. Gui v. INS, 280 F.3d 1217, 1225 (9th Cir.2002). We grant the petition because the IJ did not allow Zhu’s lawyer to cross-examine the government’s key witness — the questioned documents examiner who issued a report opining that Zhu’s documents were fraudulent. Cross-examination should have been allowed. See 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(4)(B) (providing that an alien in a removal hearing must have “a reasonable opportunity ... to cross-examine witnesses presented by the government”); Saidane v. INS, 129 F.3d 1063, 1064-65 (9th Cir.1997). The witness was available by telephone, and, contrary to the government’s assertions, Zhu did object to the IJ’s ruling at the appropriate times and noted specific deficiencies with the report. The result of this error is that the adverse credibility finding was proee-durally flawed.

We remand for a new hearing. See Soto-Olarte v. Holder, 555 F.3d 1089, 1096 (9th Cir.2009).

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Fensong Zhu v. Holder, 331 F. App'x 500 (9th Cir. 2009).

331 F. App'x 500 (Fensong Zhu v. Holder) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Preet Kaur v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General
418 F.3d 1061 (Ninth Circuit, 2005)
Ahmed M. Doumbia v. Alberto R. Gonzales
472 F.3d 957 (Seventh Circuit, 2007)
Soto-Olarte v. Holder
555 F.3d 1089 (Ninth Circuit, 2009)
O-D
21 I. & N. Dec. 1079 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1998)