Gurpreet Singh v. Eric Holder, Jr.
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22703
| 4th Cir. | 2012Background
- Singh, a 1985-born Sikh from Punjab, India, fled after police and political actors pressured his family; he sought withholding of removal under INA and protection under CAT.
- He testified to police abuse, torture, and family political conflict involving his father Surinder and the Akali Dal vs Congress parties.
- Singh first appeared before an IJ in 2008; initially no interpreter, later a Punjabi interpreter was provided; the hearing was continued to ensure comprehension.
- The IJ denied relief under both INA and CAT, citing an adverse credibility determination and lack of corroboration under the REAL ID Act.
- The Board affirmed, including a ruling that interpreter incompetence did not violate due process, leading Singh to appeal.
- On review, the Fourth Circuit upheld the agency’s credibility ruling and denied relief under both INA and CAT, finding no reversible error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the REAL ID Act credibility standard supports denial of withholding | Singh argues the credibility finding is unfounded and wrongfully denies withholding. | Singh’s credibility-and-corroboration failures justified denial under the REAL ID Act. | Substantial evidence supports the adverse credibility ruling and denial. |
| Whether CAT relief requires a separate, individualized risk despite credibility issues | Singh asserts ongoing torture risk and seeks CAT relief notwithstanding credibility concerns. | Board properly analyzed CAT factors; no likelihood of torture more likely than not. | No reversible error; Singh not more likely than not to be tortured. |
| Whether incompetent interpreter violated due process | Singh contends interpreter incompetence impaired his right to a full and fair hearing. | No prejudice shown; no demonstrated impact on the outcome. | Harmless error; no due process violation established. |
| Whether relocation within India undermines withholding of removal | Relocation to non-Punjab areas would not be safe due to political persecution risk. | Record shows Singh could relocate within India; Punjab-specific threat insufficient for country-wide relief. | Substantial evidence supports denial of withholding due to lack of country-wide risk. |
Key Cases Cited
- INS v. Stevic, 467 U.S. 407 (1984) (persecution standard; nexus to statutorily protected grounds)
- Camara v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 361 (4th Cir. 2004) (requirement to provide specific cogent reasons for adverse credibility findings under REAL ID Act)
- Rusu v. INS, 296 F.3d 316 (4th Cir. 2002) (pre-REAL ID standard on credibility and independence of corroboration)
- Gandziami-Mickhou v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 351 (4th Cir. 2006) (affidavits from family/friends vs. independent corroboration)
- Marynenka v. Holder, 592 F.3d 594 (4th Cir. 2010) (corroboration and credibility considerations under REAL ID Act)
- Djadjou v. Holder, 662 F.3d 265 (4th Cir. 2011) (heart of the claim standard abrogation under REAL ID Act)
- Shrestha v. Holder, 590 F.3d 1034 (9th Cir. 2010) (REAL ID Act credibility standard recognized nationwide)
- J-Y-C, 24 I. & N. Dec. 260 (BIA 2007) (interpretation of credibility standards under REAL ID Act)