Opinion ID: 2802962
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: April 2011 Removal Hearing

Text: On the day of the April 2011 merits hearing, Awoleye filed an updated asylum application that amended his earlier application, in relevant part, to state that his mother “was gun shot and survived.” At the merits hearing, the IJ heard testimony from Awoleye. While testifying, Awoleye named different siblings who were killed by the NNIFG, and stated that the asylum application had mixed up the siblings’ names. 1 woleye also stated that his mother was shot with an arrow. When the IJ questioned Awoleye about these discrepancies, Awoleye’s attorney stated that they were her fault. Her firm had confused the siblings’ names on the application, and she had assumed that 1 Awoleye’s asylum application and one portion of his attached affidavit stated that Oluwafemi (a brother) and Oluwafunmilayo (a sister) were killed on April 24, 2010, and Oluwashola (a brother) and Oluwatofunmi (a sister) were killed on June 28, 2010. In another portion of his affidavit, as well as at the hearing, Awoleye testified that Oluwafunmilayo and Oluwatofuni (the two sisters) were killed on April 24, 2010 and that Oluwashola and Oluwafemi (the two brothers) were killed on June 28, 2010. 4 Case: 14-13124 Date Filed: 05/22/2015 Page: 5 of 29 when Awoleye said his mother had been shot, he meant shot with a gun, and had revised the application that morning at her office. Finding that Awoleye had failed to carry his burden to present credible and consistent testimony, the IJ denied all requested relief. In discrediting Awoleye’s testimony, the IJ identified a number of discrepancies between Awoleye’s testimony and his asylum application. For example, Awoleye’s asylum application stated the NNIFG had forced Awoleye to renounce his own belief in Christianity, whereas he testified at the hearing that the NNIFG wanted his father to stop preaching Christianity; and his amended asylum application said his mother was shot with a gun, but Awoleye testified she was shot with an arrow. The IJ also identified implausibilities in Awoleye’s story and the lack of eyewitness statements or other corroborating evidence establishing that the NNIFG was responsible for his siblings’ deaths. Alternatively, the IJ concluded that Awoleye was not entitled to asylum on the merits because he had not established a well-founded fear of future persecution.2 Because Awoleye had not met the lower burden of proof for asylum, the IJ concluded that Awoleye also was ineligible for withholding of removal. Finally, the IJ determined that Awoleye had not shown that Nigerian officials 2 The IJ also concluded that Awoleye’s asylum application was untimely, but the BIA never adopted or affirmed this finding, and we do not address it. See Al Najjar v. Ashcroft, 257 F.3d 1262, 1284 (11th Cir. 2001) (stating that we review the BIA’s decision “except to the extent it expressly adopts the IJ’s opinion”). 5 Case: 14-13124 Date Filed: 05/22/2015 Page: 6 of 29 would seek to harm him or acquiesce in the NNIFG’s attempts to harm him, and thus Awoleye was not entitled to CAT relief.