Opinion of the Court — Mahadeo v. Attorney General of the United States

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Per curiam: Yes — no individual author
Filed: Dec. 22, 2011
Case: Mahadeo v. Attorney General of the United States
Case status: Decided

Source The opinion is per curiam: issued in the name of the court, with no individual author. This is a fact about the opinion, not missing data.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

OPINION PER CURIAM. Anne Marie and Rampat Mahadeo petition for review of a final order of removal. For the reasons discussed below, we will dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review. I. The petitioners, husband and wife citizens of Trinidad and Tobago, were charged as removable under 8 U.S.C. § 1227 (a)(1)(B). Both conceded remova-bility and applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). At a hearing before an immigration judge (“IJ”), Rampat testified that he had been injured by his Hindu family members and members of their church because of his conversion to Christianity and that those family members had likewise harassed Anne Marie. He testified further that he reported one incident to the Trinidadian police who declined to intervene and explained that it was a family matter. The petitioners claimed that because of their mistreatment at the hands of Rampat’s family they feared persecution based on their religion should they return to Trinidad and Tobago. The IJ denied the petitioners’ applications, and they appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”). There, they claimed that the IJ ignored their e…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.