Case Name: Saul Gregorio MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-07-25
Citations: 72 F. App'x 564
Docket Number: No. 02-71478; Agency No. A70-217-803
Parties: Saul Gregorio MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 72
Pages: 564–565

Head Matter:
Saul Gregorio MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.
No. 02-71478. Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted July 15, 2003.
Decided July 25, 2003.
Before KLEINFELD, WARDLAW, Circuit Judges, and POGUE, CIT Judge.
The Honorable Donald Pogue, U.S. Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Saul Martinez, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals denying his application for asylum and rquest for withholding of deportation. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a (repealed 1996) and we grant the petition.
As both parties conceded, the BIA undertook an independent analysis of Martinez's testimony and "agreed with," but did not adopt, the IJ's decision that Martinez's description of past persecution was not credible. See Cordon-Garcia v. INS, 204 F.3d 985, 990 (9th Cir.2000) ('Where the BIA reviews the IJ's decision de novo, our review is limited to the BIA's decision, except to the extent the IJ's opinion is expressly adopted."). The adverse credibility determination resulted from Martinez's misrepresentation on his initial asylum application that he had been persecuted based on political belief, rather than sexual orientation. He explained the misrepresentation was due to a fear of facing further persecution if the government learned of his sexual orientation.
The BIA provided no "specific cogent reasons" for rejecting this justification. Valderrama v. INS, 260 F.3d 1083, 1085 (9th Cir.2001). Moreover, "misrepresentations [that] are wholly consistent with [petitioner's] testimony and application for asylum" do not support a negative credibility finding. Akinmade v. INS, 196 F.3d 951, 955 (9th Cir.1999); see also Paramasamy v. Ashcroft, 295 F.3d 1047, 1053 (9th Cir.2002). Because the BIA stated only that it was "not persuaded by respondent's explanations" and provided no legitimate, let alone cogent, reason for rejecting Martinez's "wholly consistent" misrepresentation, we remand for proceedings consistent with this disposition.
PETITION GRANTED.
KLEINFELD, Circuit Judge, dissenting.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.