Camille v. Blanche – Do It For The Caselaw

Holding: The Ninth Circuit denied the petition for review, holding that substantial evidence supported the agency's adverse credibility determination and the subsequent denial of asylum, withholding of removal, and Convention Against Torture claims.
Standard: Substantial evidence review for adverse credibility determinations under the REAL ID Act
Vote: The panel unanimously concluded the case was suitable for decision without oral argument.
Practical effect: The petition for review was denied, the temporary stay of removal was lifted, and the motion to stay removal was denied, allowing for the enforcement of the removal order.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied a petition for review of an immigration order dismissing an asylum claim. The court held that substantial evidence supported the agency's adverse credibility determination based on inconsistencies between the petitioner's testimony and documentary evidence.

Background

Obersson Camille, a native and citizen of Haiti, petitioned for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture.

The court’s reasoning

The panel reviewed the agency’s factual findings for substantial evidence, applying standards governing adverse credibility determinations under the REAL ID Act. The court concluded that substantial evidence supported the agency’s adverse credibility determination based on inconsistencies between Camille’s testimony and his documentary evidence. In the absence of credible testimony, the asylum and withholding of removal claims failed. The court also found substantial evidence supported the denial of the Convention Against Torture claim because it relied on the same non-credible evidence and Camille provided no other evidence showing it was more likely than not he would be tortured if returned to Haiti. The court did not address contentions regarding Form I-213 as the Board of Immigration Appeals found it unnecessary to rely on that form.

What it means going forward

The petition for review was denied, the temporary stay of removal was lifted, and the motion to stay removal was denied, allowing for the enforcement of the removal order.