## Facts

- Juan Francisco Cordero-Trejo, a Guatemalan national, entered the United States and sought asylum and withholding of deportation.
- He testified that he worked with a religious organization providing aid to needy Guatemalans, especially in rural areas.
- He alleged anonymous threats tied to his aid work, including warnings to stop his activities.
- He asserted armed men attacked and seriously injured his brothers, allegedly linking the attacks to his work.
- He stated that in 1987 the military stopped him during a rural mission and accused him of “inciting rebellion.”
- He reduced and then stopped his activities by June 1990 due to continuing threats.
- He claimed that in October 1990 members of a “death squad” detained and robbed him and told him to leave Guatemala.
- He submitted documents describing general conditions in Guatemala, including threats to religious and social activists and activity by military/paramilitary groups.

## Issues

1. Whether the BIA’s adoption of the immigration judge’s adverse credibility findings and factual conclusions denying asylum was supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.
2. Whether the agency failed to evaluate the claim in light of general country conditions and pattern-or-practice evidence as required by regulation.
3. Whether the agency’s determination that Cordero-Trejo was statutorily ineligible for asylum and withholding was lawful given the evidence and governing standards.

## Decision

- The First Circuit vacated the BIA’s decision and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court held that the adverse credibility findings were without foundation in the record and could not support the denial of relief.
- The court held that the BIA’s statutory-ineligibility conclusion depended on the unsupported credibility analysis.
- The court held that the BIA failed to assess the claim in light of general conditions in Guatemala and failed to consider pattern-or-practice evidence required by regulation.

## Legal Principles

- Agency factfinding in immigration cases is reviewed for substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole; unsupported or unreasonable findings cannot stand.
- Adverse credibility determinations must rest on specific, record-based reasons; minor discrepancies or speculation about how persecutors operate cannot justify wholesale disbelief.
- Asylum requires proof of past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution on account of a protected ground; withholding requires a higher likelihood showing.
- Adjudicators must consider both individualized evidence and relevant country-conditions evidence, including pattern-or-practice evidence of persecution of similarly situated persons.

## Conclusion

The First Circuit set aside the BIA’s denial of asylum and withholding because the agency relied on credibility findings not supported by the record and failed to evaluate the claim against background evidence of conditions and pattern-or-practice persecution in Guatemala, requiring remand for a proper assessment.


Cordero-Trejo v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv., 40 F.3d 482 (1st Cir. 1994)