Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
DERVIS YUKSEL, Petitioner, v. LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM*
Dervis Yuksel, a native and citizen of Turkey, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals' (BIA) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge's decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review the agency's legal determinations de novo, and factual findings for substantial evidence. Wakkary v. Holder, 558 F.3d 1049, 1056 (9th Cir. 2009).
Yuksel argues that the immigration judge erred by deeming his cousin's affidavit irrelevant on the grounds that Yuksel's testimony about his own activities and experiences had been found not to be credible. But the BIA did consider the cousin's affidavit, along with the other documentary evidence offered by petitioner, and substantial evidence supports the Board's conclusion that Yuksel did not show an individualized risk of persecution or that there is a pattern or practice of persecution of ethnic Kurds in Turkey. See id. at 1060, 1066. The evidence does not compel the conclusion that there is systemic persecution of this ethnic minority in Turkey, see Lolong v. Gonzales, 484 F.3d 1173, 1180–81 (9th Cir. 2007), or that it is more likely than not that Yuksel will be tortured if he returns to Turkey, see Wakkary, 558 F.3d at 1067–68 (citing Kamalthas v. INS, 251 F.3d 1279, 1283 (9th Cir. 2001)). Finally, we agree with the BIA that Yuksel did not establish that he was denied a fair hearing. See Vargas-Hernandez v. Gonzales, 497 F.3d 919, 925 (9th Cir. 2007).
PETITION DENIED.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 13-70561
Decided: January 17, 2017
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)