Guta-Tolossa v. Holder
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 5561
| 1st Cir. | 2012Background
- Guta-Tolossa, an Ethiopian Oromo, fled Ethiopia in 2005 amid family arrests and persecution of Oromo activists and distributed anti-government pamphlets.
- He entered the U.S. with a false passport, was arrested by ICE near El Paso, and placed in removal proceedings that were transferred to Boston.
- He applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT relief based on his political opinion, membership in a social group (Oromo), and ethnicity.
- The IJ denied relief, citing lack of corroborating evidence and noting a key inconsistency between his testimony and a later ICE Record of Sworn Statement, but did not issue an explicit credibility finding.
- The BIA affirmed the IJ’s denial, holding his corroborating evidence was reasonably available, and Guta-Tolossa filed a petition for review in 2010 and a motion to reopen/remand with the BIA in 2010–2011; the court now remands for BIA reconsideration on credibility and corroboration issues.
- The court explicitly does not address the CAT claim and focuses on the REAL ID Act issues surrounding credibility and corroboration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Presumption of credibility on appeal | Guta-Tolossa should receive rebuttable credibility presumption on appeal | BIA did not explicitly address credibility and may rely on IJ findings without presumption | Remand to address presumption of credibility on appeal |
| Corroboration timeline under 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii) | Corroboration may be required before or without explicit credibility finding | Corroboration rule applies even without explicit credibility finding | Remand to determine whether corroboration can be requested independent of an explicit credibility finding |
| Notice requirement for corroborating evidence under 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii) | If applicant is otherwise credible, IJ must notify and allow rebuttal evidence | Not clear whether notice is implicit or explicit in statute | Remand to resolve whether notice is required and how it applies to this record |
Key Cases Cited
- Kho v. Keisler, 505 F.3d 50 (1st Cir. 2007) (presumption of credibility on appeal)
- Chhay v. Mukasey, 540 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2008) (corroboration may follow credibility considerations)
- Hayek v. Gonzales, 445 F.3d 501 (1st Cir. 2006) (corroboration and credibility guidance)
- Dehonzai v. Holder, 650 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2011) (corroborating evidence may bolster credibility)
- Morgan v. Holder, 634 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 2011) (explicit credibility determination not always required for corroboration)
- Zeru v. Gonzales, 503 F.3d 59 (1st Cir. 2007) (discussion on notice and credibility issues in 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii))
- Castañeda-Castillo v. Holder, 638 F.3d 354 (1st Cir. 2011) (statutory interpretation of REAL ID Act provisions)
- INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12 (2002) (remand where agency should address unresolved questions)
- Ren v. Holder, 648 F.3d 1079 (9th Cir. 2011) (notice requirement for corroborating evidence under 1158(b)(1)(B)(ii))