Javier Omar Giron-Rizo v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 16 May 1996, available at: https://www.refworld.org/cases,USA_CA_9,3ae6b66b44.html [accessed 4 November 2019]
Comments
Submitted: 9 May, 1996; Filed: 16 May, 1996
Disclaimer
This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.
JAVIER OMAR GIRON-RIZO, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. No. 94-70723 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT May 9, 1996, Submitted, Pasadena, California May 16, 1996, FILED
Prior History:
Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. BIA No. A29 201 355.
Disposition:
The petition is DISMISSED
Counsel:
For JAVIER OMAR GIRON-RIZO, Petitioner: Xavier J. Vega, Esq., Los Angeles, CA. For IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent: Regional Counsel, Western Region, Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA. District Counsel, IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Office of the District Counsel, Los Angeles, CA. Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Legal Officer, IMMIGRATION & NATURALIZATION SERVICE, San Francisco, CA. OIL, Karen Fletcher Torstenson, Esq., Keisha Dawn Bell, Attorney, OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION, Civil Division, Washington, DC.
Judges:
Before: REINHARDT, KOZINSKI, and HAWKINS, Circuit Judges.
Opinion:
MEMORANDUM * * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. The petitioner appeals from an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals affirming an immigration judge's decision that Giron-Rizo did not qualify for asylum or withholding of deportation. Because the Board conducted a de novo review and did not incorporate the immigration judge's decision, we review the decision of the Board. Although Giron-Rizo, a citizen and native of Nicaragua, was jailed for three months by the Sandinistas, he acknowledged on his asylum application that he was jailed for deserting the army. It is well established, however, that punishment for desertion does not constitute persecution. Matter of Virgil, Int. Dec. (BIA 1988). Apart from the punishment he received for deserting the army, Giron-Rizo did not present any evidence in his asylum application or hearing to show that he was persecuted in Nicaragua or that he had a well founded fear of persecution. He certainly did not present evidence that ". . . was such that a reasonable factfinder would have to conclude that the requisite fear existed. " INS v. Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. 812, 815 (1992). Accordingly, we conclude that the BIA's decision that Giron-Rizo was not eligible for asylum was supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole. If Giron-Rizo is ineligible for asylum, he is also ineligible for withholding of deportation. INS. v. Cardoza Fonseca, 480 U.S. 421, 94 L. Ed. 2d 434, 107 S. Ct. 1207 (1987). Therefore, we affirm the Board's decision. The Petition is DISMISSED
