Miranda-Alvarado v. Gonzales

449 F.3d 915 (2006)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Miranda-Alvarado v. Gonzales

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
449 F.3d 915 (2006)

Facts

Roberto Miranda-Alvarado (plaintiff) was a citizen of Peru who joined the civil guard when he was 19 years old. Miranda-Alvarado’s job initially involved guarding government officials and protecting banks from assaults by guerilla groups that opposed the government, such as Sendero Luminoso, also known as Shining Path. Shining Path was a Maoist organization that carried out terrorist attacks on government leaders and on civilians alike. Because Miranda-Alvarado spoke Quechua, in addition to Spanish, his duties included serving as a community leader in a neighborhood that spoke Quechua and protecting the neighborhood from infiltration by Shining Path. Miranda-Alvarado’s service as a community leader put him at risk. For example, Shining Path shot a community leader and blew her body up with explosives. Eventually, Miranda-Alvarado was ordered to interpret for officers who carried out interrogations of people suspected of being members of Shining Path. During these interrogations, people were tortured with electric shocks and beaten. Miranda-Alvarado translated for these interrogations for seven years, around two to three times monthly. Miranda-Alvarado later went to the United States (defendant) and sought asylum, admitting that he had witnessed acts of torture but had not personally engaged in such acts. Miranda-Alvarado indicated that he could not prevent the torture, and he indicated that refusing to interpret would have negatively affected his performance review and his ability to be promoted. Miranda-Alvarado did try to resign once after six years, citing family reasons on his resignation form. However, Miranda-Alvarado testified that he attempted to resign because he did not like how the people being interrogated were being abused. Miranda-Alvarado stated that he fled to America because he and his family had been targeted by Shining Path. An immigration judge determined that Miranda-Alvarado was barred from asylum because of his participation in the persecution of others. The Board of Immigration Appeals affirmed. Miranda-Alvarado sought review.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Berzon, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership