Case Summary
**Case Summary: Armando Bajacan v. Eric Holder, Jr. (Docket No. 2607053)**
**Court:** United States Court of Appeals
**Date:** [Insert date of decision]
**Background:**
Armando Bajacan, a native of the Philippines, appealed a decision made by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) regarding his immigration status in the United States. Bajacan had previously sought relief from removal based on claims of fear of persecution if returned to the Philippines. The central issues in the case involved the interpretation of “particularly serious crimes” and whether Bajacan was eligible for withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
**Facts:**
Bajacan was convicted of a crime that the immigration authorities deemed a “particularly serious crime,” which triggered the bar to his eligibility for relief from deportation. Bajacan argued that his conviction did not qualify as a particularly serious crime, as defined by statutory and case law, and that he faced real risk of persecution in the Philippines due to his political opinion.
**Legal Issues:**
1. Whether Bajacan's conviction constituted a “particularly serious crime” under INA provisions.
2. Whether Bajacan presented sufficient evidence to demonstrate a likelihood of persecution upon return to the Philippines.
3. The standards of proof and interpretation of evidence concerning fear of persecution.
**Decision:**
The appellate court upheld the BIA’s determination that Bajacan's conviction qualified as a particularly serious crime, which barred him from receiving withholding of removal. The court also found that Bajacan had not provided credible evidence to support his claims of persecution, thereby affirming the BIA's decision to deny his application for relief.
**Conclusion:**
The ruling reinforced the application of the particularly serious crime doctrine in immigration cases and clarified the evidentiary standards required for claims of persecution. Bajacan's appeal was denied, and he remained subject to removal from the United States.
**Significance:**
This case highlights the challenges faced by individuals seeking asylum or protection under U.S. immigration laws, particularly in light of criminal convictions. It emphasizes the importance of the legal standards for demonstrating eligibility for relief from removal based on fear of persecution.