[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________ FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
No. 08-12334 ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FEBRUARY 19, 2009
_______________________
THOMAS K. KAHN
CLERK
Agency No. A95-900-639
GLADYS DE JESUS GOMEZ DE ESCOBAR,
Petitioner,
versus
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Respondent.
________________________
Petition for Review of a Decision of the
Board of Immigration Appeals
_________________________
(February 19, 2009)
Before BIRCH, HULL and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for the withholding of removal.
Accepting the testimony of the petitioner we find that this record compels a finding
of past persecution. Adefemi v. Ashcroft,
358 F.3d 828, 837 (11th Cir. 2004).
Once past persecution is established, the petitioner is entitled to a rebuttable
presumption of future persecution and the burden “then shifts to the government to
establish by a preponderance of the evidence either that the country’s conditions
have changed, or ‘that the alien could avoid a future threat to his life or freedom by
relocating to another part of the proposed country of removal, and [that] it would be
reasonable to expect him to do so.’” Sanchez Jimenez v. U.S. Att’y Gen.,
492 F.3d
1223, 1238 (11th Cir. 2007) (quoting Mendoza v. U.S. Att’y Gen.,
327 F.3d 1283,
1287 (11th Cir. 2003)) (alteration in original).
Therefore, we remand this case to the Board of Immigration Appeals for
remand to an Immigration Judge for a supplemental hearing.
Reversed in part and Remanded for a supplemental hearing.
2
HULL, Circuit Judge, dissenting:
I respectfully dissent because the record, in my view, does not compel a
finding of past persecution.
3
