Sandie v. Attorney General of United States

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the IJ. could require further corroborating evidence even when the record “include[d] statements from multiple witnesses and two experts”
• rejecting petitioner’s argument that “the credibility determination is a necessary predicate to the corroboration determination”
• \[W]e must assume Sandie's testimony is credible because we have no credibility determination to review from the BIA.\
• “We review factual findings, including findings of persecution and fear of persecution, under the substantial evidence standard.”
• “But the assumption that his testimony is credible does not imply that that testimony is sufficient to meet his burden of proof. In fact, credible testimony alone is not always sufficient to meet the burden of proof.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).