Jalloh v. Ashcroft

U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 13957

Cherno Jalloh, a citizen of Sierra Leone, applied for asylum eight months after being admitted on a non-immigrant visa into the United States in 1998.  Upon appearing before an immigration judge to support his claim of asylum due to political opinion, the judge determined that Jalloh not only did not prove himself a credible witness but consequently also did not prove a “well founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particle social group, or political opinion” if he was to return to Sierra Leone. 

Following the immigration judge’s decision, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed the judge’s denial of Jalloh’s asylum petition.  However, the BIA did overturn the IJ’s determination that Jalloh was not a credible witness. 

Upon the BIA restoring Jalloh’s credibility, Jalloh appealed to the US Court of Appeal, stating that the IJ had denied his petition because a “well found fear of persecution” could not be established partially due to the IJ’s decision that Jalloh was not credible. 

While in Sierra Leone, Jalloh lived in the town on Kenema with his parents and siblings and attended secondary school.  On December 2, 1998 returned to his home to find his house on fire and him mother, father and four siblings shot to death. Jalloh believed that his father’s support of the Kamajors caused the renegade soldiers to target his family after hearing that another family that supported the Kamajors was also targeted that day.  After feeling to a displacement camp Jalloh meet his father’s friend, Abdul Traore, who took him to safety in Guinea and then provided him with a false passport with Jalloh’s picture so that he could gain access the United States.

This false passport and a false Sierra Leonean identification card caused not only Jalloh questionability as a credible witness but also made it hard to positively connect Jalloh to Sierra Leone and the persecution he might have received there. 

The US Court of Appeals, however, found that in addition to the fact that the BIA did restore Jalloh’s credibility, Jalloh presented probable evidence to connect his family’s political opinion and the violence his family suffered.  The court also stated that Jalloh evidence seemed to show that he would be recognized and target if he was to return to his country.  Because of the BIA’s reversal of credibility and wrong assignment of burden of proof, the court vacated the order of the BIA and remanded to further consider the case.