Siskind Susser

Green Card LotteryABCs of ImmigrationHiring A LawyerHealth Care Info CenterImmigration SitesFashion, Arts & / Sports Newsletter

Siskind Immigration Bulletin Request Consultation Ask Visalaw Client Login
About the Firm
Our Offices
Our Team
In the News
Practice Areas and Services
Scheduling a Consultation
ABCs of Immigration
Requests For Proposals
Press Room


Immigration Forms
Government Processing Times
State Department Visa Bulletin
Siskind's Immigration Professional
Working in America
Washington Updates
Publications
The Visalaw Blog

MEMBER OF THE
AMERICAN
IMMIGRATION
LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION


LAUNCH CHAT

< back

 

News From The Courts

Lissitchev v. Ashcroft

Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals

2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 7997

 

Petitioner Bisser Lissitchev, who claimed that he was repeatedly beaten and threatened because of his political affiliation in Bulgaria, applied for asylum and sought withholding of removal.  Asylum was denied because his application was untimely.  The IJ denied withholding of removal based on its conclusion that the Petitioner’s testimony was not credible.  The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the IJ’s decision.  The Petitioner appealed the BIA’s decision and the Tenth Federal Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the BIA’s order and remanded for further proceedings.

 

The Petitioner must show a “clear probability of persecution attributable to race, religion, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion” to be granted withholding of removal.  The IJ denied withholding because he concluded that the Petitioner’s testimony as to such persecution was not credible.  Specifically, the IJ pointed out the following: the State Department did not regard Bulgaria as a country where the authorities would persecute based on membership in an organization; the Petitioner’s political group was part of the coalition government from 1997 to 2000; there were inconsistencies between the Petitioner’s testimony and his application for asylum; and the Petitioner’s physical injuries were not credible because he could not suffer so many beatings without sustaining permanent injuries.

 

The 10th Circuit held that the BIA’s decision to affirm the IJ’s holding was not supported by substantial evidence and therefore vacated the decision.  The Circuit court pointed out the following as reasoning for its decision: persecution need not come from governmental authorities; the Petitioner suffered persecution before his political group became part of the coalition government; the stated inconsistencies arose due to inadequate translations; and Petitioner had pointed out that even though the beatings were great in number, they did not cause permanent injuries.

 

< BackIndex | Next >

 

Print This Page

Disclaimer: This newsletter is provided as a public service and not intended to establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.

Siskind Susser Bland
1028 Oakhaven Rd.
Memphis, TN 38119
T. 800-343-4890 or 901-682-6455
F. 901-682-6394
Email: info@visalaw.com

Home | Immigration Bulletin | Green Card Lottery Center | ABCs of Immigration | Hiring A Lawyer
Hot Topics | Health Care Info Center | Immigration Sites | Search



This is an advertisement. Certification as an Immigration Specialist is not currently available in Tennessee. Siskind Susser Bland limits its practice strictly to immigration law, a Federal practice area, and we do not claim expertise in the laws of states other than where our attorneys are licensed. Siskind Susser Bland does not retain clients on the strength of advertising materials alone but only after following our own engagement procedures (e.g. interviews, conflict checks, retainer agreements). The information contained on this site is intended to educate members of the public generally and is not intended to provide solutions to individual problems. Readers are cautioned not to attempt to solve individual problems on the basis of information contained herein and are strongly advised to seek competent legal counsel before relying on information on this site. Siskind Susser Bland and its advertisers are independent of each other and advertisers on this site are not being endorsed by Siskind Susser Bland by virtue of the fact that they appear on this page. Site is maintained by Siskind Susser Bland's Memphis, TN office and overseen by Gregory Siskind. Copyright © 2003-2006 Siskind Susser Bland. All rights reserved.