Dwomoh v. Sava
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
696 F. Supp. 970 (1988)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
Nana Asante Dwomoh (plaintiff) entered the United States from Ghana, and the Immigration and Naturalization Service, represented by Charles Sava (plaintiff), began deportation proceedings. After applying for political asylum in a proceeding before the immigration judge (IJ), Dwomoh testified that he joined the Ghanian military in 1974 and attained the rank of sergeant. In 1981, the Ghanian military seized power from the democratically elected government and prohibited all peaceful means of political change. In 1985, Dwomoh joined a coup seeking to overthrow the military dictatorship. Dwomoh testified that, before the coup began, members of the military government arrested Dwomoh and beat him to try and obtain a confession. The military dictatorship then detained him for more than a year before Dwomoh escaped and fled to the United States. The IJ denied Dwomoh’s application for political asylum, and Dwomoh appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). The BIA affirmed the IJ decision, finding that even though he testified credibly, Dwomoh did not qualify as a refugee under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The BIA concluded that the Ghanian government sought to prosecute him for treason because of his participation in a coup seeking to overthrow the government rather than for his political opinion. Dwomoh appealed to the Southern District of New York, renewing his application for political asylum.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wood, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.