Dechang Yang v. Sessions
698 F. App'x 647
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- Petitioner Dechang Yang, a Chinese national, sought asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief after claiming persecution for his underground Christian practice.
- An IJ denied relief in January 2015 based on an adverse credibility finding; the BIA affirmed on April 29, 2016. Yang petitioned for review in the Second Circuit.
- Key factual dispute: Yang testified his friend evaded arrest during a church raid, but the friend’s letter said he was arrested and detained.
- Yang testified he left China using his passport because his parents paid to have his arrest record deleted; that detail was omitted from his written application and his father’s letter.
- Letters from Yang’s father and from Lin were offered but the IJ found them contradicted or failed to corroborate material aspects of Yang’s account; authors were unavailable for cross-examination.
- The agency concluded the credibility finding was dispositive for asylum, withholding, and CAT relief because all claims relied on the same facts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the IJ’s adverse credibility finding was supported by substantial evidence | Yang argued his testimony was truthful and letters corroborated his claim | Government argued inconsistencies and omissions undermined credibility | Court held substantial evidence supported the adverse credibility finding |
| Inconsistency about friend’s arrest during church raid | Yang maintained friend evaded arrest | Government pointed to friend’s letter saying he was arrested | Held inconsistency was a proper basis for disbelief; no explanation from Yang required |
| Omission of passport/record-deletion explanation from application and father’s letter | Yang offered no explanation for omission | Government argued omission suggested fabrication | Held omission supported adverse credibility because Yang included related facts but omitted this key detail |
| Corroboration and weight of supporting letters | Yang argued letters corroborated his story | Government argued letters contradicted or failed to rehabilitate testimony and authors unavailable for cross-exam | Held IJ reasonably gave diminished weight to letters and found lack of reliable corroboration; credibility finding dispositive for all relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Yun-Zui Guan v. Gonzales, 432 F.3d 391 (2d Cir. 2005) (standard for reviewing BIA and IJ decisions)
- Xiu Xia Lin v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 2008) (REAL ID Act allows credibility findings based on any inconsistency or omission)
- Majidi v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 77 (2d Cir. 2005) (adverse credibility based on specific inconsistent statements is generally upheld)
- Biao Yang v. Gonzales, 496 F.3d 268 (2d Cir. 2007) (failure to corroborate may bear on credibility)
- Y.C. v. Holder, 741 F.3d 324 (2d Cir. 2013) (diminished weight for letters when authors unavailable and authors are interested parties)
- Paul v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 148 (2d Cir. 2006) (adverse credibility finding can be dispositive for asylum, withholding, and CAT claims)