99 F.2d 729 (9th Cir. 1938), 8717, Monji Uyemura v. Carr
|Citation:||99 F.2d 729|
|Party Name:||MONJI UYEMURA v. CARR, District Director, United States Immigration Service.|
|Case Date:||October 18, 1938|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit|
J. Edward Keating and Theodore E. Bowen, both of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellant.
Ben Harrison, U.S. Atty., and Francis C. Whelan and Maurice Norcop, Asst. U.S. Attys., all of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee.
Before GARRECHT, HANEY, and STEPHENS, Circuit Judges.
GARRECHT, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from an order of the District Court discharging a writ of habeas corpus and remanding appellant to the custody of the Immigration Authorities for deportation.
On August 1, 1936, appellant was arrested under a warrant issued July 31, 1936, by an Assistant to the Secretary of Labor which charged: (1) That he is in the United States in violation of the Immigration Act of 1924, in that at the time of his entry he was not in possession of an unexpired immigration visa (8 U.S.C.A. § 213(a); and, (2) that he is in the United States in violation of the Immigration Act of 1924, in that he is an alien ineligible to citizenship, not exempted by paragraph (c) section 13 thereof (8 U.S.C.A. § 213(c).
The warrant of arrest was based upon information that appellant, an alien and a subject of Japan who had originally illegally entered the United States sometime prior to 1924, had returned to Japan in the year 1928 or 1929 and again illegally entered the United States at an unknown Mexican border port sometime subsequent to August 5, 1930, having passed in transit through the port of San Pedro, California, August 4, 1930, on the SS Bokuyo Maru destined for Mexico.
After a hearing before the Immigration Inspector and a review of all the proceedings by the Board of Review, the Assistant Secretary of Labor, upon recommendation of the Board, issued his warrant for the deportation of appellant to Japan. Appellant thereupon filed his petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the United States District Court. Upon issuance of the writ and return by appellee, the cause was submitted on briefs. On September 15, 1937, the Court entered its order with the above noted result. From this order the present appeal is taken.
Appellant presents two specifications of error for our consideration, namely: (1) The Court erred in holding and deciding that there was material testimony in support of the warrant of deportation in that all the evidence adduced against appellant demonstrated that he had resided continuously in the United States since prior to July 1, 1924; and, (2) the Court erred in holding and deciding that appellant had been given a fair hearing.
Appellant admits that he entered the United States illegally and that at the time of his entry he was not in possession of an immigration visa. He contends, however, that as his entry occurred in 1919, and because he has resided continuously in the United States subsequent to...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP