FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT JANUARY 24, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H]

I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 13485 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ B I A N os . A 79- 489- 664 & A 93- 411- 188 E R I C K B E R T R A N D , M I M O S E J E A N - J A C Q U E S , P e titio n e r s , v ersu s U .S . A T T O RN E Y G E N E R A L , R e s p o n d e n t.

________________________ P e t i t i on f orR e vi e w of

aD e c i s i on of

the B o a r d o f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls

_________________________ ( Jan u ar y 24, 2008) B efo re T JO F L A T , C A RN E S an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: E ri ck B ertrand , a nat i ve and ci t i ze n o f H ai t i proceedi ng pro se, se eks r evi ew2

of the f i na l or de rof

the B oa r d of

I m m i gr a t i on A ppe a l s a f f i rm i ng the I m m i gr a t i on J u d g e ’s o r d e ro f

r e m o v a l. B e rtr a n d ’s ap p lic a tio n is o n b e h a lf o f h im s e lf a n d h is w i fe , M i m ose J ean Jac qu es . B ertrand cont ends thatthe B IA erre d b y f i nd i ng that he di d n otsa t i sf

y hi s c l ai m for pol i t i ca l as yl um , w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al , and rel i ef unde rthe U ni t e d N a t i ons C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e a nd O the rC rue l , I nhum a n, o rD e g r a d in g T r e a tm e n t o rP u n is h m e n t. T h e g o v e rn m e n t r e s p o n d s th a t: ( 1 ) th is C o u rt d o e s n o t h a v e ju r is d ic tio n o v e rB e rtr a n d ’s ap p e a l b e c au s e h e f a ile d to e xhaus thi s a dm i ni s tr a t i ve r e m e di e s , a nd the r e f or e hi s pe t i t i on s houl d be di s m i s s e d; and (2) the IJ ’ s f

i nd i ng thatB ertrand ’ s t es t i m on y l ac ked credi bi l i ty w as supp ort ed b y s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . W e l ackj u ri sd i ct i o n t o co n si d er a cl ai m rai sed i n a p et i t i o n fo r rev i ew u n l ess th e p e titio n e rh a s e x h au s te d h is a d m in is tr a tiv e r e m e d ie s . S e e 8 U .S .C . § 1252( d) ( 1) ; s e e a l s o S unda rv. I N S , 328 F . 3d 1320, 1323 ( 11th C i r . 2003) (e xp l ai ni ng thatthe exhaust i on re qu i re m enti s j uri sdi ct i on al , such thatw e “ l ac k j ur i s di c t i on t o c ons i de rc l a i m s tha tha ve notbe e n r a i s e d be f or e the B I A ” ) . T he gove rnm e nt ’ s c ont e nt i on tha tB e rtr a nd f a i l e d t o e xhaus thi s a dm i ni s tr a t i ve re m ed ies is b as ed o n th e p ro p o siti o n th at b ec au se h e f ailed to ar g u e a g ain st th e I J’s a dve r s e c r e di bi l i ty f

i ndi ng t o the B I A , he f

a i l e d t o e xhaus thi s a dm i ni s tr a t i ve r e m e di e s . I f

the gove rnm e nt ’ s pr opos i t i on w e r e c orr e c t , i t s c ont e nt i on w oul d be a ls o ; b u t it’s n o t.3

In o rd er t o p ro p erl y rai se an i ssu e b efo re th e B IA , th e p et i t i o n er m u st m en ti o n th e iss u e a n d d iscu ss it s m er it s o r h is b as is fo r c o n ten d in g th at th e I J’s deci si on of i ti s w rong . S ee A l i m v. G on za l es , 44 6 F . 3d 12 39 , 12 53 (11th C i r. 2006) ( hol di ng tha tw he r e the pe t i t i one rf a i l e d t o pr e s e ntthe i s s ue a nd di s c us s the m e r i t s o f h i s c l a i m o rth e b a s i s f

o rth e I J ’ s d e c i s i o n d u r i n g h i s ap p e a l t o th e B I A, h e h ad n o tex h au st ed h i s ad m i n i strat i v e rem ed i es). B ertran d d i d st at e i n h i s req u est f o rr e v ie w to th e B I A th a t h e w a s s e e k in g to c h a lle n g e th e I J ’s a d v e r s e c r e d ib ility f in d in g , a n d h e a r g u e d th a t th e r e c o r d d id n o t s u p p o rt th a t c r e d ib ilityf in d in g . B e c aus e tha ti s e nough t o e xhaus thi s a dm i ni s tr a t i ve r e m e di e s f ortha ti s s ue , w e do h a v e ju r is d ic tio n to d e c id e th is ap p e a l. B e rtr a n d c o n te n d s th a t th e B I A e rr e db yf in d in g th a t h e d id n o t s a tis f yh is cl ai m for pol i t i ca l as yl um , w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al , and rel i ef un der the U ni t ed N at i on s C on vent i on A gai nstT orture because hi s t es t i m on y e st abl i shed thathe had s uf f e r e d pa s tpe r s e c ut i on a nd ha d aw e l l - f ounde d f e a rof f utur e pe r s e c ut i on i f

he r e turne d t o H a i t i . W he n the B I A i s s ue s ade c i s i on, w e r e vi e w onl ytha tde c i s i on, e xc e ptt o the e xt e nttha tthe B I A e xpr e s s l ya dopt s the I J ’ s de c i s i on. A l N a jj a rv. A shcr oft , 25 7 F . 3d 12 62 , 12 84 (11th C i r. 20 01 ). In the re cord before us, the B IA a dopt e d a nd a f

f i rm e d the I J ’ s de c i s i on w i th r e ga r d t o B e rtr a nd’ s c r e di bi l i ty , a nd th e n w e n t o n to d is c u s s B e rtr a n d ’s c la im th a t h e h a d m e t h is b u r d e n o f p r o o f to e s t abl i s h e l i gi bi l i ty f

ora s y l um , w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , a nd r e l i e f

unde rthe4

C o n v e n t i o n Ag a i n s tT o rtu r e . B e c au s e th e B I A p r o v i d e d a d d i t i o n a l a n a l y s i s , we r e v ie w its d e c is io n a s w e ll a s th e I J ’s . W e r e vi e w the f

a c tua l de t e rm i na t i ons of the I Ja nd the B I A unde rthe subst ant i al evi dence t es t , and w e “ af fi rm the [I J’ s and ] B IA ’ s dec i si on [s ] i f [ they ar e] supp ort ed by re as on abl e, subst ant i al , and p robat i ve evi dence on the re cord c ons i de r e d a s aw hol e . ” I d. ( i nt e rna l quot a t i on m a rks and c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . T he s ubs t a nt i a l e vi de nc e t e s ti s “ de f e r e nt i a l ” a nd doe s nota l l ow “ r e - w e i gh[ i ng] the e vi de nc e f

r om s c r a t c h. ” M a z a r i e gos v. O f f i c e of U ni t e d S t a t e s A tt ’ yG e n. , 241 F . 3d 1320, 1323 ( 11th C i r . 2001) ( c i t a t i on om i tt e d) . “ T o r e ve r s e the I J ’ s [ a nd B I A ’ s ] f a c tf i ndi ngs , w e m us tf

i nd tha tthe r e c or d notonl ys upport s r e ve r s a l , but com pel s i t . ” M endo zav. U ni t ed S t at es A tt ’ y G en. , 32 7 F . 3d 12 83 , 12 87 (11th C i r. 2003) ( c ons i de r i ng w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l c l a i m ) . T he f

a c ttha te vi de nc e i n the r e c or d m a y a l s o s upportac onc l us i on c ontr a ryt o the a dm i ni s tr a t i ve f i ndi ngs i s not enou gh t o j ust i fya r ever sa l . A defe m i v. A shcr oft , 38 6 F . 3d 10 22 , 10 27 (11th C i r. 2004) ( e n ba nc ) . W e r e vi e w the r e c or d e vi de nc e i n the l i ghtm os tf a vor abl e t o the IJ’ s an d B IA ’ s d eci si o n s an d d raw al l reaso n ab l e i n feren ces i n fav o r o f th o se d e c is io n s . I d .

“ T o est abl i sh as yl um el i gi bi l i ty bas ed on po l i t i ca l op i ni on or any other p ro t ect ed g ro u n d , th e al i en m u st , w i th cred i b l e ev i d en ce, est ab l i sh (1 ) p ast pe r s e c ut i on on a c c ountof [ hi s ] pol i t i c a l opi ni on ora nyothe rpr ot e c t e d gr ound, or5

( 2) a‘ w e l l - f

ounde d f e a r ’ tha t[ hi s ] pol i t i c a l opi ni on ora nyothe rpr ot e c t e d gr ound w i l l c aus e f

utur e pe r s e c ut i on. ” S e pul ve dav. U ni t e d S t a t e s A tt ’ yG e n. , 401 F . 3d 1226, 1230–31 ( 11th C i r . 2005) . “ T o e s t abl i s h a s y l um ba s e d on pa s tpe r s e c ut i on, the appl i c a ntm us tpr ove ( 1) tha t[ he ] w a s pe r s e c ut e d, a nd ( 2) tha tthe pe r s e c ut i on w a s on a c c ountof

apr ot e c t e d gr ound. T o e s t abl i s h e l i gi bi l i tyf ora s y l um ba s e d on a w el l -f ou nd ed fe arof future pers ec ut i on , the appl i cantm ustprov e ( 1) a

‘ s ubj e c t i ve l y ge nui ne a nd obj e c t i ve l yr e a s onabl e ’ f e a rof pe r s e c ut i on, tha ti s ( 2) on a c c ountof

apr ot e c t e d gr ound. ” S i l vav. U ni t e d S t a t e s A tt ’ yG e n. , 448 F . 3d 1229, 12 36 (11th C i r. 20 06 ) ( ci t at i on s om i tt ed). A re qu es tfor w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al re qu i re s thatan al i en show thathi s l i fe orf r e e dom w oul d m or e l i ke l y tha n notbe thr e a t e ne d i n hi s c ountryof or i gi n on a c c ountof

r a c e , r e l i gi on, na t i ona l i ty , m e m be r s hi p i n apa rt i c ul a rs oc i a l gr oup, or po l i t i ca l op i ni on . 8 U . S . C . § 1 23 1(b)(3); S epul veda, 40 1 F . 3d at12 32 . W here a pe t i t i one rf

a i l s t o e s t abl i s h e l i gi bi l i tyf ora s y l um , w hi c h c a rr i e s al ow e rbur de n of p r o o f th a n f o rw ith h o ld in g o f

r e m o v a l, h e a ls o f

a ils to e s tab lis h e lig ib ilityf o rth is other f orm of re l i ef

. S ee A l N ajj ar , 25 7 F . 3d at12 93 . F urtherm ore, l i ke the bu rden of pr oof f ora n appl i c a nts e e ki ng w i thhol di ng of r e m ova l , the bur de n of pr oof f or a n appl i c a nts e e ki ng r e l i e f unde rthe C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e i s hi ghe rtha n the bur de n i m pos e d on a n a s y l um appl i c a nt . I d. a t1303.6

“ [A ] n adv er se cr edi bi l i ty det erm i nat i on al on e m aybe suff i ci entt o sup po rt the deni al of an as yl um appl i ca t i on ” w hen there i s no evi dence of pers ec ut i on other tha n the appl i c a nt ’ s s t a t e m e nt s . F or gue v. U ni t e d S t a t e s A tt ’ yG e n. , 401 F . 3d 12 82 , 12 87 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). H ow ever , an advers e c re di bi l i ty det erm i nat i on do es nota l l e vi a t e the I J ’ s duty t o c ons i de rothe re vi de nc e pr oduc e d bythe a s y l um appl i c a nt . I d. “ T he w e a ke rthe appl i c a nt ’ s t e s t i m ony , . . . the gr e a t e rthe ne e d f or c orr obor a t i ve e vi de nc e . ” Y a ng v. U ni t e d S t a t e s A tt ’ yG e n. , 418 F . 3d 1198, 1201 ( 11th C i r . 2005) . A l though m i nori nc ons i s t e nc i e s tha ta r e i m m a t e r i a l w i l l not s u p p o rt a n a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityf in d in g , in c o n s is te n c ie s ab o u t m a te r ia l m a tte r s w ill. N re ka v. U ni t ed S t at es A tt ’ y G en. , 40 8 F . 3d 13 61 , 13 69 (11th C i r. 20 05 ). T h e I J ’s a d v e r s e c r e d ib ilityf in d in g w a s s u p p o rte d b ys u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . B e rtr a nd t e s t i f

i e d tha the l i ve d i n the U ni t e d S t a t e s f r om 1996 thr ough 1999 a nd th e n r e tu rn e d to H a iti. T h e c ru c ia l p a rt o f h is te s tim o n yw a s th a t f r o m J u lyto S e pt e m be r2000 he w a s i n H a i t i w he r e he w a s pe r s e c ut e d bys upport e r s of the L av al as p o l i t i cal g ro u p b ecau se o f h i s m em b ersh i p i n a p o l i t i cal o rg an i zat i o n . A s a r e s u lt o f th a t p e r s e c u tio n , B e rtr a n d te s tif ie d , h e f le d b a c kto th e U n ite d S ta te s in O ct ob er20 00 . H ow ever , the go vernm entpres ent ed evi dence thatB ertrand w as i ssu ed a F l o ri d a d ri v ers l i cen se i n A u g u st2 0 0 0 an d w as l i st ed ata F l o ri d a ad d ress in S e p te m b e r2 0 0 0 , s tr o n g lys u g g e s tin g th a t B e rtr a n d w a s n o t p r e s e n t in H a iti dur i ng the t i m e he s a i d he w a s pe r s e c ut e d. B e rtr a nd f a i l e d t o pr oduc e a ny7

e v id e n c e th a t h e w a s in H a iti in J u lyth r o u g h S e p te m b e r2 0 0 0 , a n d h e f a ile d to a d e q u a te lye x p la in th e e x is te n c e o f th e d r iv e r s lic e n s e is s u e d o n A u g u s t 2 3 , 2 0 0 0 . Th e s e i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s , w h i c h w e n tt o th e v e ryb a s i s o f Be rtr a n d ’ s a s y l u m c l a i m, ga ve the I Js uf

f i c i e ntr e a s on t o di s be l i e ve B e rtr a nd’ s t e s t i m ony . S e e N r e ka , 408 F . 3d a t1369. A c c or di ngl y , the I J ’ s a dve r s e c r e di bi l i tyf i ndi ng w a s s upport e d by s u b s ta n tia l e v id e n c e . B ec ause the IJ ’ s a dv er se cr edi bi l i ty f i nd i ng w as supp ort ed by subst ant i al e v id e n c e , a n d B e rtr a n d f a ile d to p r o v id e a n ya d d itio n a l e v id e n c e to s u p p o rt h is c la im f o ra s y lu m , th e B I A ’s d e c is io n th a t B e rtr a n d h a df a ile d to e s tab lis h e lig ib ility for a sy l um w as al so supp ort ed by subst ant i al evi dence. S ee M endo za , 32 7 F . 3d at 12 87 . M oreover, because B ertrand di d n otes t abl i sh el i gi bi l i ty f or as yl um , w hi ch carr i es a l ow erbu rden of proo f than the w i thh ol di ng of re m ov al and rel i ef un der the C onve nt i on A ga i ns tT ortur e , the s e c l a i m s f a i l a s w e l l . S e e A l N a

jj a r , 257 F . 3d a t 1 2 9 3 , 1 3 0 3 . P E T I T I ON DE NI E D.