Arakas v. Zimmerman, 10753.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
Writing for the CourtGOODRICH, McLAUGHLIN and STALEY, Circuit
Citation200 F.2d 322
PartiesARAKAS v. ZIMMERMAN.
Docket NumberNo. 10753.,10753.
Decision Date04 December 1952

200 F.2d 322 (1952)

ARAKAS
v.
ZIMMERMAN.

No. 10753.

United States Court of Appeals Third Circuit.

Argued October 14, 1952.

Decided December 4, 1952.


Lena L. Orlow, Philadelphia, Pa. (Orlow & Orlow, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellant.

Alfred L. Luongo, Asst. U. S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa. (Gerald A. Gleeson, U. S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., William B. Taffet, District Counsel, Immigration and Naturalization Service, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.

Before GOODRICH, McLAUGHLIN and STALEY, Circuit Judges.

McLAUGHLIN, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court granting appellee's motion to dismiss a petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Appellant, a Greek national, entered this country as a seaman in 1927. While here he jumped ship and thereafter remained illegally in the United States. Sometime later expulsion proceedings were instituted against him. After hearing he was ordered deported and was actually deported on November 9, 1932. On October 26, 1942, he reentered the United States as an alien seaman.

200 F.2d 323
He again jumped ship and stayed illegally in this country. He was arrested and on April 10, 1943, after hearings on the warrant of arrest, was ordered deported. On his motion the proceedings were reopened and further hearings were held on March 9 and April 18, 1944. Deportation was recommended in an opinion filed July 29, 1944, by the presiding inspector. On November 3, 1944, the Board of Immigration Appeals granted appellant permission to depart voluntarily four months after the close of hostilities in Europe. In 1946 and 1947 the Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization granted several extensions of time to appellant within which to depart voluntarily. These were principally to enable him to obtain certain medical treatments. On August 5, 1947, the Commissioner again ordered appellant's deportation. An appeal was taken to the Board and dismissed by that body. In January, 1948, a private bill was introduced in the United States Senate on appellant's behalf. Deportation was held up during its pendency. It eventually failed of passage

On October 6, 1949, appellant was ordered to surrender for deportation. He petitioned the Commissioner for a stay so that he might become eligible for a suspension of deportation under the seven years' residence provision of a 1948 amendment to the Immigration Act, 8 U.S.C.A. Section 155(c), infra. The Commissioner denied the application. Arakas appealed to the Board and at the same time moved for reopening of the proceedings for consideration of suspension of deportation. The Board denied both the application for stay and motion to reopen by its order of October 26, 1949. He, having by that time established his seven years' residence, applied to the Board for a reopening of the proceedings. The motion was denied and the petition for habeas corpus followed. The motion to dismiss that petition was granted by the district court on September 26, 1951.

The issue before us is whether, on the above facts, due process requires that appellant be granted a hearing on his application for suspension of deportation.

Under the governing law, 8 U.S. C.A. Section 155(c), the pertinent amendment to which became effective July 21, 1948,1 it was within the discretion of the Attorney General to suspend the deportation of Arakas as the latter's status came within the provisions of the section. He had resided in the United States continuously for seven years and was so residing upon the effective date of the amendment to the statute. The fact that a large part of that residence was within a period when he was actually under an order of deportation does not militate against its validity, and this is conceded by the Government. It...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Angelis v. Bouchard, Civ. A. No. 883-59.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. District of New Jersey
    • 29 Febrero 1960
    ...an application for suspension of deportation, although brought under the 1917 Immigration Act, is Arakas v. Zimmerman, 3 Cir., 1952, 200 F.2d 322, in which the Court of Appeals was confronted with the question whether the applicant for suspension of deportation had been accorded due process......
  • Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Jong Ha Wang, 80-485
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • 2 Marzo 1981
    ...the present procedures, the grant or denial of a motion to reopen was solely within the discretion of the Board. See Arakas v. Zimmerman, 200 F.2d 322, 323-324, and n. 2 (CA3 1952). The present regulation is framed negatively; it directs the Board not to reopen unless certain showings are m......
  • Wolf v. Boyd, 15101.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
    • 19 Enero 1957
    ...record. This the Board was entitled to do. United States ex rel. Adel v. Shaughnessy, 2 Cir., 183 F.2d 371; Arakas v. Zimmerman, 3 Cir., 200 F.2d 322. Petitioner in effect asserts that because she sees fit to designate her petition a "Motion to Reopen" rather than "Application for Suspensio......
  • Matter of Reyes, Interim Decision Number 2907
    • United States
    • U.S. DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals
    • 30 Junio 1982
    ...provided that the grant or denial of a motion to reopen was solely within the discretion of the Board. See Arakas v. Zimmerman, 200 F. 2d 322, 323 n. 2 (3 Cir. 1952); Kavadias v. Cross, 82 F. Supp. 716, 719-20 (N.D. Ind. 1948). We do not find the absence of such specific authorization in th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT