Sacul v. Ashcroft
Docket: No. 03-72125
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; November 21, 2004; Federal Appellate Court
Ramon Chocooj Sacul, a Guatemalan citizen, petitioned for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) decision, which upheld the Immigration Judge's (IJ) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT). The court has jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 and reviews BIA's factual findings for substantial evidence while assessing due process challenges de novo. The petition for review was denied. The court found that Sacul did not meet his burden of proving eligibility for asylum, noting that while a reasonable factfinder might have found evidence of past persecution, the evidence did not compel such a finding. Consequently, he failed to meet the even stricter criteria for withholding of removal. His CAT claim was also unsuccessful, as he did not prove it was more likely than not that he would face torture upon returning to Guatemala. Sacul's due process claims were dismissed, as the IJ's conduct, including interruptions and perceived sarcasm, did not demonstrate bias or prejudice. The IJ is permitted to engage in examination and cross-examination per 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(1), and Sacul failed to show that he was harmed by the IJ's actions. Additionally, Sacul's motion for a stay of removal included a request for a stay of voluntary departure, which was granted due to the government's non-opposition. This stay will remain in effect until the mandate is issued. The court's decision is not suitable for publication and is restricted from citation under Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.