Arriza-Escobar (not precedential)
Arriza-Escobar v. Holder
Not Precedential
June 1, 2010
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/093193np.pdf
Judges Sloviter, Jordan, and Greenberg. Per Curiam.
Overturning the BIA and Immigration Judge Eugene Pugliese.
A man fearing the MS-13 gang sought asylum and IJ Pugliese and the BIA denied the asylum request. The Third Circuit, however, concluded that the BIA made a mistake by ruling that he did not establish a well-founded fear of future persecution. The BIA said there was no evidence that there could be future harm. Mr. Arriza-Escobar testified about the threats. By saying there was no evidence, the BIA misstated the record. The BIA also incorrectly assumed that if his brother faced no threats, that he could not possibly face threats in the future. That was an improper assumption. Even though it could be an area to explore and analyze, it is wrong to make an assumption that if someone's brother faces no threats, the person could not possibly face future threats.
Not Precedential
June 1, 2010
http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/093193np.pdf
Judges Sloviter, Jordan, and Greenberg. Per Curiam.
Overturning the BIA and Immigration Judge Eugene Pugliese.
A man fearing the MS-13 gang sought asylum and IJ Pugliese and the BIA denied the asylum request. The Third Circuit, however, concluded that the BIA made a mistake by ruling that he did not establish a well-founded fear of future persecution. The BIA said there was no evidence that there could be future harm. Mr. Arriza-Escobar testified about the threats. By saying there was no evidence, the BIA misstated the record. The BIA also incorrectly assumed that if his brother faced no threats, that he could not possibly face threats in the future. That was an improper assumption. Even though it could be an area to explore and analyze, it is wrong to make an assumption that if someone's brother faces no threats, the person could not possibly face future threats.
posted by Rex at 9:00 AM
2 Comments:
Props to my partner, Derek DeCosmo, who represented the petitioner in this case. Good work Derek!
Hi, great reading your post
Post a Comment
<< Home