Singh v. Ashcroft
Singh v. Ashcroft
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
Tara Singh, a native and citizen of India, petitions for review of the decision of the
Substantial evidence supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination, based on Singh’s demeanor and inconsistencies that went to the heart of his claim. See Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183 F.3d 1147, 1151-52 (9th Cir. 1999). The record does not compel the opposite result. See Elias-Zacarias, 502 U.S. at 483-84, 112 S.Ct. 812.
Because Singh did not testify credibly, he failed to establish eligibility for asylum. See Mejia-Paiz v. INS, 111 F.3d 720, 723 (9th Cir. 1997). It follows that he also failed to establish eligibility for withholding of removal. See Alvarez-Santos v. INS, 332 F.3d 1245, 1255 (9th Cir. 2003).
Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s conclusion that Singh is not entitled to relief under the Convention Against Torture because he did not demonstrate that it is more likely than not that he would be tortured upon return to India. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d 1153, 1156-57 (9th Cir. 2003).
PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
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.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.