50 F.2d 497 (D.D.C. 1931), 5032, United States v. De Francis
|Citation:||50 F.2d 497|
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES v. DE FRANCIS.|
|Case Date:||May 04, 1931|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit|
Argued March 4, 1931.
Appeal from the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.
Leo A. Rover and Rebekah S. Greathouse, both of Washington, D.C., for the United States.
J. S. Hornback and Roger Moore, both of Washington, D.C., for appellee.
Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, and ROBB, VANORSDEL, HITZ, and GRONER, Associate Justices.
VANORSDEL, Associate Justice.
This appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court of the District, dismissing the petition of the United States Attorney to cancel the naturalization certificate of the appellee, Robert De Francis.
It appears that appellee filed his declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United States on July 11, 1922; and he filed a petition for naturalization on November 22, 1926. In this petition he stated, among other things, 'I am attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States. ' Attached to the petition were the affidavits of two witnesses to the effect that they had personal knowledge that the petitioner was a person of good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States. These same witnesses appeared before a naturalization examiner and orally testified to the same facts, admitting, however, that they knew that the petitioner had been arrested for violations of the National Prohibition Act (27 USCA), but stated that they did not know the outcome of the arrests. The testimony of these witnesses was repeated under oath in the Supreme Court of the District, at the hearing on the naturalization petition, September 6, 1927. At this time the petitioner also stated under oath that he was attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States. At the hearing, the naturalization examiner called the attention of the court to the fact that the petitioner had been convicted of violations of the National Prohibition Act. The presiding justice required whether there was any proof that petitioner had sold intoxicating liquor, to which the examiner answered in the negative. The certificate of citizenship was thereupon granted.
In the petition for cancellation, the United States Attorney charges that the appellee, for the period of five years preceding the filing of his petition for naturalization, and at the time of naturalization, 'was not a person of good moral character, nor attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, nor well disposed to the good order and happiness of the United States. ' A number of convictions of criminal offenses, involving the manufacture, sale, and possession of intoxicating liquor, in violation of the Prohibition Act, are set forth in the petition, occurring prior to the date of filing his petition for naturalization, and one conviction for a second offense in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia on January 7, 1927,...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP