## Facts

- Norma Antonia Jacinto Carrillo and her minor son were natives and citizens of Guatemala.
- Jacinto filed an affirmative asylum application in December 1994, alleging persecution by members of the Guatemalan military connected to her family and her common-law husband (a former military member).
- The INS initiated deportation proceedings in March 1995 by issuing an Order to Show Cause and Notice of Hearing.
- Jacinto appeared without counsel, relied on interpretation, and had limited ability to understand U.S. legal procedures.
- After hearings in August 1995 and January 1996, the immigration judge (IJ) denied asylum, withholding of deportation, and voluntary departure.
- The IJ found Jacinto lacked a well-founded fear of persecution and made an adverse credibility determination, citing her inability to explain why the military was pursuing her and her husband and a failure to show subjective fear.
- The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed, rejecting Jacinto’s due process challenge, upholding denial of asylum and withholding, and affirming denial of voluntary departure based on her stated unwillingness to leave the United States.
- Jacinto petitioned for review, arguing the IJ’s conduct of the hearing denied her a full and fair opportunity to present her claim, including by limiting her ability to give narrative testimony and failing to explain procedures and what she needed to prove.

## Issues

1. Whether the manner in which the IJ conducted the hearings denied Jacinto due process by failing to ensure she understood the nature of the proceedings and the requirements for asylum and by limiting her ability to present testimony.
2. Whether any procedural errors caused prejudice affecting the outcome of Jacinto’s requests for asylum, withholding of deportation, or voluntary departure.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit held that Jacinto was denied due process because she did not receive a full and fair hearing.
- The court found the IJ inadequately explained hearing procedures and did not determine whether Jacinto understood the process or what she needed to prove to establish asylum.
- The court concluded the IJ failed to provide a reasonable opportunity for Jacinto to present her account through narrative testimony and did not sufficiently develop the record given her pro se status.
- The court held the errors were prejudicial because they affected record development and were tied to the adverse credibility finding and the assessment of fear of persecution.
- The court vacated the BIA’s decision and remanded for a new hearing consistent with due process requirements.

## Legal Principles

- Noncitizens in removal proceedings are entitled to due process, including a full and fair hearing and a meaningful opportunity to be heard.
- When an applicant is unrepresented and not fluent in English, the IJ must take reasonable steps to ensure the applicant understands the nature of the proceedings, applicable procedures, and the basic elements required to establish the relief sought.
- In asylum proceedings involving pro se applicants, the IJ has an affirmative duty to develop the record, including eliciting relevant facts necessary for fair adjudication.
- Unreasonable restriction of an applicant’s ability to present coherent testimony, including through narrative testimony where appropriate, may contribute to a due process violation when it prevents effective presentation of the claim.
- To obtain relief for a due process violation, the petitioner must show prejudice, meaning a reasonable likelihood that the procedural defects affected the outcome.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit vacated and remanded because the hearing procedures used for a pro se, non-English-speaking asylum applicant failed to provide a full and fair opportunity to present her case, and the resulting record deficiencies likely affected the credibility and persecution determinations.


Jacinto v. INS, 208 F.3d 725 (9th Cir. 2000)