(DOWNLOAD) "Immigration Law - First Circuit's Deferential Standard for Reviewing Adverse Credibility Determinations in Asylum Cases Remains Unchanged - Cuko V. Mukasey." by Suffolk University Law Review * eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Immigration Law - First Circuit's Deferential Standard for Reviewing Adverse Credibility Determinations in Asylum Cases Remains Unchanged - Cuko V. Mukasey.
- Author : Suffolk University Law Review
- Release Date : January 22, 2009
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 297 KB
Description
An Immigration Judge (IJ) or the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) will commonly deny an application for asylum in the United States as a result of an adverse credibility determination. (1) Appellate Courts give adverse credibility determinations great deference on appeal if the IJ gave specific reasons justifying the finding. (2) In Cuko v. Mukasey, (3) the First Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether an adverse credibility determination based on perceived inconsistencies in testimony and the applicant's demeanor should be upheld under this deferential standard of review. (4) The First Circuit, applying the substantial evidence standard, denied the petition for review because the record did not compel a decision contrary to that of the IJ and BIA. (5) Vllasi Cuko, a citizen of Albania, filed an application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) in response to removal proceedings initiated in July 2001. (6) During the hearing, Cuko testified that prior to leaving Albania he was persecuted by the Albanian government because of his affiliation with the Democratic Party and was thus seeking asylum in the United States. (7) According to the IJ's decision, Cuko changed his testimony multiple times with regard to how he obtained his Democratic Party membership card, seemingly because he realized it was inconsistent with his prior testimony. (8) The IJ also made note of the fact that a certificate from the Democratic Party branch office dated December 28, 2001 contradicted Cuko's testimony that he was an active member of the party until March 2001. (9) The IJ found that these two discrepancies were material because they went to the heart of his claim; consequently, Cuko was not eligible for asylum because his testimony was not credible. (10) The IJ also mentioned other discrepancies that were not themselves material, but "became material in combination with Cuko's other perjurious testimony," and gave additional evidence for an adverse credibility finding. (11)