Glaring Errors on Credibility Require Overturning Denial of Asylum (not precedential)

"J.C." v. Gonzales
No. 04-4685
Jan. 31, 2006
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/044685np.pdf
Not Precedential decision

The IJ denied asylum and the BIA agreed. The Third Circuit reversed. The Third Circuit noted that "the problems with several of the IJ’s credibility determinations are so glaring that it would be manifestly unjust if we were to let them pass without comment" even though the immigrant did not raise the issue in its appeal.

Basically, the IJ had a hard time comprehending the asylum-seeker's testimony. At the end of the case, the IJ incorrectly concluded that the asylum-seeker wa confused and got her facts backwards. The Third Circuit strongly disagreed, saying that "Rather, the confusion appears to rest with the IJ."

Also, at one point the asylum-seeker mistakenly said "sterilization" instead of "abortion" and quickly corrected herself. The IJ ruled this one slip proved she was so "clearly confused" that the entire testimony must have been fabricated. The Third Circuit disagreed and ruled it was just a minor slip and certainly not proof that the entire story was a lie.

I won't bother summarizing two other errors by the IJ, which the Third Circuit ruled were not bases for finding the asylum-seeker not credible.