Case: 20-60037 Document: 00515635494 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/12/2020 United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED November 12, 2020 No. 20-60037 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk Fithawi Teklay Sebhatleab, Petitioner, versus William P. Barr, U.S. Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A201 682 381 Before Wiener, Southwick, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:* Fithawi Teklay Sebhatleab, proceeding pro se, has petitioned for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The BIA denied his motion to remand and dismissed an appeal from an immigration judge’s order denying asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the * Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4. Case: 20-60037 Document: 00515635494 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/12/2020 No. 20-60037 Convention Against Torture (CAT). We DENY IN PART the petition for review and DISMISS IN PART for lack of jurisdiction. When considering a petition for review, we review the opinion of the immigration judge (IJ) when it influenced the BIA decision, as it did here. See Wang v. Holder, 569 F.3d 531, 536 (5th Cir. 2009). We review factual findings for substantial evidence, meaning that we do not reverse the BIA’s factual findings “unless the evidence compels it.” Id. at 536–37. The IJ found that Sebhatleab was not credible. The credibility determination relied in part on the supposed inconsistency in the assertions by Sebhatleab and Teklemariam, his friend with whom he escaped, about the distance between the Tessenei prison where they were detained and the Sudanese border. Sebhatleab testified that “[i]f you walk, it would take you almost 10 hours,” and Teklemariam’s statement was that “the prison was not that far from the Etrirean/Sudanese border and we managed to walk on foot across the border.” We do not see any inconsistent meaning in the two ways to refer to the distance. “Not that far” might well take several hours to traverse if the distance has to be travelled on foot. Though these two statements do not affect Sebhatleab’s credibility, there was other evidence on which the IJ based the credibility decision. She found that his testimony regarding certain important details was inconsistent from his credible-fear hearing to his removal proceeding, including the timeline of threats and detention, where on the body injuries were inflicted, and how Sebhatleab and his friend escaped. She also found that he had used false documents to travel through the Middle East, Africa, and to South America. The IJ’s credibility finding is a reasonable interpretation and is supported by substantial evidence, which we sustain when the evidence fails to compel the opposite finding. Chun v. I.N.S., 40 F.3d 76, 79 (5th Cir. 1994). It fails to compel a different finding here. 2 Case: 20-60037 Document: 00515635494 Page: 3 Date Filed: 11/12/2020 ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals