Fofanah v. Gonzales
| Decision Date | 11 May 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 05-1808.,05-1808. |
| Citation | 447 F.3d 1037 |
| Parties | Abubakarr FOFANAH, Petitioner, v. Alberto GONZALES, Attorney General of the United States of America, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
Uche Nwaneri and P. Chinedu Nwaneri, St. Paul, MN, for appellant.
Diana Ryan, Asst. U.S. Attorney, Rapid City, SD, for appellee.
Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, McMILLIAN* and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
Petitioner Abubakarr Fofanah is a native and citizen of Sierra Leone who came to the United States from Guinea by stowing away on a cargo ship. When the Department of Homeland Security commenced removal proceedings, Fofanah conceded removability and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, relief under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"), and alternatively for voluntary departure. Following an evidentiary hearing, the Immigration Judge ("IJ") issued an oral decision denying all relief on alternative grounds. Fofanah appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA"), which affirmed the IJ's decision to deny relief on the ground that Fofanah's testimony was not credible. Fofanah petitions for judicial review of that final order. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We deny the petition.
For ten years beginning in 1991, the people of Sierra Leone suffered from a violent and crippling civil war between the government and Revolutionary United Front (RUF) rebels allied with Charles Taylor's National Front forces in neighboring Liberia. Tens of thousands of civilians died and some one-third of the population was displaced as the combatants fought for control of Sierra Leone and its rich diamond mines. The RUF held as much as one-half the country in 1999 and 2000 but suffered military defeats in early 2001 and agreed to a cease-fire in May 2001. The Department of State Country Reports for 2002 reported that the conflict officially ended in January 2002, with President Ahmed Kabbah's government controlling the entire country, assisted by U.N. peacekeepers. Kabbah was reelected with a large majority in Parliament in May 2002. Thereafter, the Department of State terminated temporary protected status for Sierra Leone refugees effective May 2004. See 68 Fed.Reg. 52407 (Sept. 3, 2003).
At his evidentiary hearing, Fofanah testified that he fled Sierra Leone on March 16, 2000, to escape the civil war violence after RUF rebels murdered his father. Fofanah claimed the RUF killed his father because he was a wealthy diamond dealer; a member of the minority Madingo tribe, like President Kabbah; and a Muslim Imam who had sided with the Kabbah government. After fleeing his home town of Koidu, Fofanah walked to nearby Guinea, stayed briefly at a U.N. refugee camp, and then paid $500 to stow away on a cargo ship bound for the United States. Some four weeks later, he was taken ashore in a small boat, arriving in San Jose, California, on April 12, 2000. His mother and three siblings did not flee with him, and he has not heard from them since.
Fofanah further testified that in December 1999 he was captured by RUF rebels and told that if he did not join their force, he would be killed. When he initially refused, he was beaten. He showed the court a two-inch scar on his back below his left shoulder and another across his right knee, the result, he explained, of the beatings. Fofanah testified that, after the beatings, he served briefly as an armed RUF soldier, participating in at least four armed-encounters with government forces but never shooting, dismembering, cutting, or killing anyone. After two weeks, Fofanah said, he escaped by running away as the rebels headed off for an attack.
Following the hearing, the IJ found that Fofanah was ineligible for any relief because, among other reasons, his testimony was not credible in material respects. The IJ noted inconsistencies in Fofanah's explanation of when and why his father was killed, with no documents or other objective evidence supporting his assertion that his father was killed for political, religious, and ethnic reasons, rather than because he was a wealthy diamond dealer, which is not a protected ground. The IJ also did not credit Fofanah's testimony that he was abducted and beaten by RUF rebels in December 1999 because that incident was not mentioned in his asylum application or during his credible fear interview. The IJ further noted that medical reports by Fofanah's treating physicians in this country did not mention the beatings and were inconsistent with his testimony as to when he last saw his mother and siblings and whether members of his immediate family are living in the United States. The IJ expressed concern about Fofanah's Sierra Leone passport, noting that the signature on the passport "is different than [his] regular signature." Finally, the IJ did not credit Fofanah's testimony as to when and how he arrived in the United States and came to Minnesota because it was completely undocumented and unsupported. "The Court finds it quite interesting," the IJ observed, "that all of the people who could possibly corroborate [Fofanah's] story are unreachable or have moved."
Fofanah appealed the IJ's decision to the BIA. Addressing only the IJ's adverse credibility finding, the BIA dismissed the appeal:
We agree with the Immigration Judge that [Fofanah] has not presented a credible claim for the relief he seeks. Specifically, we agree that [his] evidence contradicts itself regarding when [his] father died, why his father died, and whether [he] has seen his family members since his father's death. Moreover . . . [he] failed to adequately explain why he did not mention his own 2-week abduction by RUF soldiers on his application, during his credible fear interview, or to his doctors. Inasmuch as [Fofanah] has also presented only questionable evidence regarding his treatment during this alleged abduction, we find no reason to disturb the Immigration Judge's adverse credibility finding.
(Citations omitted.) Because the BIA did not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lovan v. Holder
...agency action, "including the IJ's findings and reasoning to the extent they were expressly adopted by the BIA." Fofanah v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 1037, 1040 (8th Cir.2006). II. Deportation Lovan's primary contention is that the BIA erred in concluding he is ineligible for waiver of deportation......
-
Mumad v. Garland
...agency action, including the IJ's findings and reasoning to the extent that the Board expressly adopted them. See Fofanah v. Gonzales , 447 F.3d 1037, 1040 (8th Cir. 2006). We review constitutional challenges like this one de novo. Lasu v. Barr , 970 F.3d 960, 964 (8th Cir. 2020).Under the ......
-
Ngengwe v. Mukasey
...the extent they were expressly adopted by the BIA." Osonowo v. Mukasey, 521 F.3d 922, 926-27 (8th Cir.2008), quoting Fofanah v. Gonzales, 447 F.3d 1037, 1040 (8th Cir.2006). "When the BIA adopts the IJ's decision, but adds reasoning of its own, we review both decisions." Setiadi v. Gonzales......
-
Zine v. Mukasey
...to much weight because the IJ sees the witness testify and is therefore in the best position to determine his or her credibility." Fofanah, 447 F.3d at 1040. Accordingly, "we defer to that finding if it is supported by a specific, cogent reason for disbelief." Aden, 396 F.3d at 968 (quotati......