Margarian v. Ashcroft

Ninth Circuit

Margarian v. Ashcroft

17 F. App'x 670

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedAugust 29, 2001

DocketNo. 99-71554; INS No. A70-960-441

StatusPublished

This text of 17 F. App'x 670 (Margarian v. Ashcroft) 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.

Bluebook

Margarian v. Ashcroft, 17 F. App'x 670 (9th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

**

Sufficient evidence supports the BIA’s denial of Margarian’s asylum claim on the grounds that she is not credible. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). “[I]f the trier of fact either does not believe the applicant or does not know what to believe, the applicant’s failure to corroborate [her] testimony can be fatal to [her] asylum application.” Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1090 (9th Cir.2000).

However, the BIA abused its discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to remand or reopen to hear her claim under the United Nations Convention Against Torture. This case is remanded in light of Kamalthas v. INS, 251 F.3d 1279 (9th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

MEMORANDUM

**

Sufficient evidence supports the BIA’s denial of Margarian’s asylum claim on the grounds that she is not credible. See INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 478, 481, 112 S.Ct 812, 117 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). “[I]f the trier of fact either does not believe the applicant or does not know what to believe, the applicant’s failure to corroborate [her] testimony can be fatal to [her] asylum application.” Sidhu v. INS, 220 F.3d 1085, 1090 (9th Cir.2000).

However, the BIA abused its discretion in denying petitioner’s motion to remand or reopen to hear her claim under the United Nations Convention Against Torture. This case is remanded in light of Kamalthas v. INS, 251 F.3d 1279 (9th Cir.2001).

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9 th Cir. R. 36-3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 F. App'x 670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/margarian-v-ashcroft-ca9-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack