ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers

Home Page

Advanced search


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

Chinese Immig. Daily

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily

 

Chinese Immig. Daily



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free
information!

Copyright
©1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here:



< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

Use ILW.COM's Case Tracking System

< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily                        < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Case Name:
KHAN V INS 
Case Number: Date Filed: 
99-71062 01/26/01 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DUKE KHAN,
Petitioner,                                           No. 99-71062

v.                                                    INS No.
                                                     A70-088-748
IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION
SERVICE,                                              OPINION
Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Board of Immigration Appeals

Argued and Submitted
December 6, 2000--Pasadena, California

Filed January 26, 2001

Before: James R. Browning, Harry Pregerson, and
Robert R. Beezer, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam Opinion
_________________________________________________________________
COUNSEL

Jesse A. Moorman and Judith L. Wood, Los Angeles, Califor-
nia, for the petitioner.

Heather R. Phillips, U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Divi-
sion, Washington, D.C., and Anh-Thu Mai, INS, Washington,
D.C., for the respondent.

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner Duke Khan appeals denial of his asylum applica-
tion on the ground that the Board erred in upholding the
exclusion for lack of authentication of certain official records

                               1214
offered during his hearing before the immigration judge. He
also appeals the exclusion of these and other documents
offered into evidence on appeal and challenges the decision of
the Board of Immigration Appeals ("BIA") on the merits of
his application. We reverse and remand for further proceed-
ings.

Khan bases his asylum claim on persecution that he suf-
fered in Bangladesh on account of his own political activities
in a Dhaka University student group. This persecution
included, inter alia, four arrests, the first of which led to a
seven-month confinement during which he was severely
beaten. Khan sought to introduce official records document-
ing the arrests and detention at his hearing. Objecting sua
sponte, immigration judge excluded the records from evi-
dence because they had not been certified as authentic, pursu-
ant to INS regulations which requires that foreign official
records "be certified by an officer in the Foreign Service of
the United States, stationed in the foreign country where the
record is kept." 8 C.F.R. S 287.6(b).

The immigration judge subsequently denied Khan's asylum
application, based in part on the lack of corroborating docu-
mentary evidence. On appeal, the BIA upheld this decision
and largely adopted the reasoning of the immigration judge.
The board also upheld the exclusion of the official records for
lack of authentication and declined to consider any further
documents on appeal.

[1] Because the exclusion of evidence was based on a
purely legal ground controlled by circuit precedent, we review
this question de novo. See Ladha v. INS , 215 F.3d 889, 896
(9th Cir. 2000); United States v. Mateo-Mendez , 215 F.3d
1039, 1042 (9th Cir. 2000). Documents may be authenticated
in immigration proceedings through any "recognized proce-
dure, such as those required by INS regulations or by the Fed-
eral Rules of Civil Procedure." Espinoza v. INS, 45 F.3d 308,
309-310 (9th Cir. 1995); Chung Young Chew v. Boyd, 309

                               1215
F.2d 857 (9th Cir. 1962). The procedure specified in"8
C.F.R. S 287.6 provides one, but not the exclusive, method."
Iran v. INS, 656 F.2d 469, 472 n.8 (9th Cir. 1981); Hoon-
silapa v. INS, 575 F.2d 735, 738 (9th Cir. 1978). It was error
to exclude the official records based solely on the lack of con-
sular certification.

Because the excluded records would have corroborated
Khan's testimony and because the denial of asylum was
based, in part, on the lack of such corroboration, we reverse
and remand to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with
this decision. Cf. In re Tijam, 1998 WL 883735, Interim Dec.
No. 3372 (BIA Dec. 10, 1998) (remand appropriate where
outcome hinged on determination of authenticity of official
record). We need not reach the other issues raised by Khan's
appeal. We note, however, that on remand Khan remains free
to offer into evidence any additional documents that he can
show were not previously available to him at the time of his
initial hearing. See 8 C.F.R. S 3.2; cf. Vides-Vides v. INS, 783
F.2d 1463, 1470 (9th Cir. 1986) (recognizing this possibility).

The petition for review is granted, the decision below
reversed and the case remanded to the BIA for further pro-
ceedings consistent with our opinion.

                               1216
					
					


• Attorney Membership    • Case Tracking   
• Immigration Daily    • Citizenship Materials   

Share this page with a friend Share this page


Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here: