USCA11 Case: 20-14488 Date Filed: 01/14/2022 Page: 1 of 11 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 20-14488 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ HELAL MOHAMMAD, Petitioner, versus U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent. ____________________ Petition for Review of a Decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A203-653-973 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 20-14488 Date Filed: 01/14/2022 Page: 2 of 11 2 Opinion of the Court 20-14488 Before WILSON, JORDAN, and BLACK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Helal Mohammad, a native and citizen of Bangladesh, seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (BIA) final order af- firming the immigration judge’s (IJ) denial of his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the United Na- tions Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). After review, 1 we deny the petition. I. ASYLUM AND WITHHOLDING OF REMOVAL As to his asylum and withholding of removal claims, Mo- hammad asserts the IJ clearly erred in finding he was only partially credible. He contends he showed past persecution and an objec- tively reasonable fear of future persecution. Mohammad also 1 We review the IJ’s opinion to the extent the BIA has found the IJ’s reasons were supported by the record and review the BIA’s decision with regard to those matters on which it rendered its own opinion and reasoning. Seck v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 663 F.3d 1356, 1364 (11th Cir. 2011). We review conclusions of law de novo and factual determinations under the substantial evidence test. Gonzalez v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 820 F.3d 399, 403 (11th Cir. 2016). Under the highly deferential substantial evidence test, we must affirm the BIA’s decision if it is “supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence on the record considered as a whole.” Adefemi v. Ashcroft, 386 F.3d 1022, 1026–27 (11th Cir. 2004) (en banc) (quotation marks omitted). USCA11 Case: 20-14488 Date Filed: 01/14/2022 Page: 3 of 11 20-14488 Opinion of the Court 3 asserts the IJ erred in concluding it was reasonable for him to relo- cate within Bangladesh. A. Credibility “The asylum applicant must establish eligibility for asylum by offering credible, direct, and specific evidence in the record.” Forgue v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 401 F.3d 1282, 1287 (11th Cir. 2005) (quo- tation marks omitted). If found to be credible, an applicant’s testi- mony may be sufficient on its own to establish the burden of proof for asylum or withholding of removal. D-Muhumed v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 388 F.3d 814, 818–19 (11th Cir. 2004). However, even if an IJ makes an adverse credibility finding, the IJ has a duty to consider other evidence produced by an asylum applicant. Forgue, 401 F.3d at 1287. A credibility determination may be based on the totality of the circumstances, including: (1) the demeanor, candor, and re- sponsiveness of the applicant; (2) the plausibility of the applicant’s account; (3) the consistency between the applicant’s written and oral statements; (4) the internal consistency of each statement; (5) the consistency of the applicant’s …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals