From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jin v. Sessions

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Apr 17, 2018
No. 13-74419 (9th Cir. Apr. 17, 2018)

Opinion

No. 13-74419

04-17-2018

GUANG RI JIN, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.


NOT FOR PUBLICATION

Agency No. A087-609-066 MEMORANDUM On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Before: SILVERMAN, PAEZ, and OWENS, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

Guang Ri Jin, a native and citizen of China, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency's factual findings, applying the standards governing adverse credibility determinations created by the REAL ID Act. Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency's adverse credibility determination based on inconsistencies between Jin's testimony and documentary evidence, and Jin's failure to submit adequate corroboration of the payments for his alleged release from detention. See id. at 1048 (adverse credibility determination reasonable under "the totality of circumstances"). Jin's explanations do not compel a contrary conclusion. See Lata v. INS, 204 F.3d 1241, 1245 (9th Cir. 2000). In the absence of credible testimony, Jin's asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

Jin's CAT claim also fails because it is based on the same testimony the agency found not credible, and Jin does not point to any other evidence in the record that compels the conclusion that it is more likely than not he would be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government of China. Id. at 1157.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.


Summaries of

Jin v. Sessions

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Apr 17, 2018
No. 13-74419 (9th Cir. Apr. 17, 2018)
Case details for

Jin v. Sessions

Case Details

Full title:GUANG RI JIN, Petitioner, v. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 17, 2018

Citations

No. 13-74419 (9th Cir. Apr. 17, 2018)