Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

tortappealhearingtestimonyasylumliens
torthearingtestimonyasylumcitizenshipliens

Related Cases

Journal v. Keisler
View Case »
Nigussie v. Ashcroft
View Case »
United States ex rel. Rongetti v. Neelly
View Case »
Xiao He Chen v. Lynch
View Case »
Almutairi v. Holder
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

Bartolome v. Sessions

Facts

Tomas Bartolome, a native of Guatemala, illegally entered the U.S. in 1994 and applied for asylum, which was denied. After being deported in 2008, he reentered the U.S. in 2015 and expressed a fear of persecution from gangs and villagers in Guatemala. An asylum officer conducted a reasonable fear interview and issued a negative determination, which Bartolome appealed to an IJ. The IJ held a review hearing where Bartolome presented additional evidence and testimony.

Tomas Bartolome is a native and citizen of Guatemala. He first entered the United States in 1994 illegally and without any governmental permission. He applied for asylum, which was denied. He was thereafter deported from the United States in February 2008. In June 2008, Bartolome attempted to reenter the United States. However, DHS found him to be inadmissible and ordered his expedited removal. After removal, he remained in Guatemala until 2015. In February 2015, Bartolome illegally reentered the United States. In March 2015, DHS served Bartolome a Notice of Intent/Decision to Reinstate Prior Order. In response, Bartolome expressed a fear of persecution or torture if returned to Guatemala. Based on his asserted fear, he was referred to an asylum officer for a reasonable fear interview.

Issue

Did Bartolome receive a fair hearing regarding his reasonable fear of returning to Guatemala, and did he establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture?

Did Bartolome receive a fair hearing regarding his reasonable fear of returning to Guatemala, and did he establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture?

Rule

Aliens subject to reinstated orders of removal are entitled to reasonable fear screening proceedings if they express fear of persecution or torture. The asylum officer's determination is subject to de novo review by an immigration judge, who must assess whether the alien has a reasonable fear of persecution or torture based on credible evidence.

Aliens subject to reinstated orders of removal are placed in reasonable fear screening proceedings, if they express fear of persecution or torture in their country of removal. 8 C.F.R. 241.8(e) , 1241.8(e) . This process consists of an interview before a United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ('USCIS') asylum officer to make a preliminary determination of reasonable fear. If the asylum officer makes a negative reasonable fear determination, the alien may request a de novo review hearing by an immigration judge ('IJ') of the asylum officer's determination.

Analysis

The court found that Bartolome was provided a fair hearing, as he had the opportunity to present his case with the assistance of an interpreter and was able to correct the asylum officer's summary. The IJ conducted a thorough review of the evidence and testimony, ultimately concluding that Bartolome's fears did not meet the legal standard for a reasonable fear of persecution or torture.

The court found that Bartolome was provided a fair hearing, as he had the opportunity to present his case with the assistance of an interpreter and was able to correct the asylum officer's summary. The IJ conducted a thorough review of the evidence and testimony, ultimately concluding that Bartolome's fears did not meet the legal standard for a reasonable fear of persecution or torture.

Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the IJ's decision, concluding that Bartolome did not establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture and that he received a fair hearing.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the IJ's decision, concluding that Bartolome did not establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture and that he received a fair hearing.

Who won?

The government prevailed in the case because the court upheld the IJ's determination that Bartolome did not establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture.

The government prevailed in the case because the court upheld the IJ's determination that Bartolome did not establish a reasonable fear of persecution or torture.

You must be