Fnu v. Holder
This text of 366 F. App'x 798 (Fnu v. Holder) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
*799 Michael FNU, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his application for withholding of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence adverse credibility determinations, and reverse only if the evidence compels a contrary conclusion. See Singh v. Gonzales, 439 F.3d 1100, 1105 (9th Cir.2006). We deny the petition for review.
The agency found petitioner not credible because he omitted from his original asylum application three incidents which allegedly precipitated his flight from Indonesia. Petitioner asserted that in these incidents, he was detained, threatened, and interrogated, and on two occasions, that he was brutally beaten to the point of unconsciousness. Substantial evidence supports this adverse credibility determination. See Alvarez-Santos v. INS, 332 F.3d 1245, 1254 (9th Cir.2003) (petitioner’s omission of a “dramatic, pivotal” event from asylum application supported agency’s adverse credibility determination). In the absence of credible testimony, petitioner’s withholding of removal claim fails. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
366 F. App'x 798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fnu-v-holder-ca9-2010.