Escobar-Mazariegos v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the IJ had found that Kaur was “a convincing witness” with a “credible demeanor” and whose “testimony was detailed, consistent and plausible”
• noting that the BIA “also made no adverse credibility finding”
• noting the formal differences between a “petition for review” and an “appeal”
• “[W]e are required to treat a petitioner’s testimony as credible when the agency does not make an adverse credibility finding . . . .”
• “We think it not too much to ask of IJs and the BIA that they make an explicit adverse credibility finding”
• “The BIA acknowledged that the IJ did not make an adverse credibility finding and also did not make one itself.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).