Eva Cardoza Molina, Ana Frances Rocha-Cardoza v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Publisher	United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Publication Date	13 May 1994
Type of Decision	93-70309
Cite as	Eva Cardoza Molina, Ana Frances Rocha-Cardoza v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, 13 May 1994, available at: https://www.refworld.org/cases,USA_CA_9,3ae6b67d1c.html [accessed 18 May 2023]
Comments	Submitted: 10 May, 1994; Flied: 13 May, 1994 The panel finds this case appropriate for submission without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and Ninth Cir. R. 34-4
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.

EVA CARDOZA MOLINA, ANA FRANCES ROCHA-CARDOZA Petitioners,
v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
No. 93-70309 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
May 10, 1994, ** Submitted, San Francisco, California ** The panel finds this case appropriate for submission
without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 34(a) and
Ninth Cir. R. 34-4.
May 13, 1994, Filed

Subsequent History: Reported as Table Case Format at: 26 F.3d 129.

Prior History:

Petition for Review of an Order of The Board of Immigration Appeals. INS No. A70-409-749

Disposition:

DENIED.

Judges:

Before: NOONAN and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges, and EZRA, *** District Judge *** Honorable David A. Ezra, United States District Judge for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation.

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 Cir. R. 36-3.

Eva Cardoza-Molina, together with her daughter Ana Frances Rocha-Cardoza, petition for review of the denial by the Board of Immigration Appeals of their petition for asylum and withholding of deportation. The petitioners have produced no evidence to show that the decision of the Board was unsupported by substantial evidence. Eva Cardoza-Molina specifically testified that the reason that she feared assassination by the Sandinistas was that her husband had been assassinated by them and that she had helped her family to go to Costa Rica together with her brother. These reasons for fearing persecution do not constitute fear of persecution on account of a political opinion. It is argued that she is a member of a social group, viz. her family, that is being persecuted. Since petitioners could not demonstrate the requisite fear of persecution required for asylum, it follows that they cannot meet the more stringent standard for withholding of deportation. De Valle v. INS, 901 F.2d 787, 793 (9th Cir. 1990). A family is not a social group under the asylum statute. Estrada-Posadas v. I.N.S., 924 F.2d 916, 919 (9th Cir. 1991).

The petition is DENIED.

Eva Cardoza Molina, Ana Frances Rocha-Cardoza v. Immigration and Naturalization Service

Subsequent History: Reported as Table Case Format at: 26 F.3d 129.

Prior History:

Disposition:

Judges:

Opinion:

Search Refworld

Countries

Topics