Dang Nam v. Bryan, No. 7302.

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (9th Circuit)
Writing for the CourtWILBUR and GARRECHT, Circuit
Citation74 F.2d 379
PartiesDANG NAM v. BRYAN, District Director of Immigration.
Docket NumberNo. 7302.
Decision Date21 December 1934

74 F.2d 379 (1934)

DANG NAM
v.
BRYAN, District Director of Immigration.

No. 7302.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

December 21, 1934.


E. J. Botts, of Honolulu, T. H., for appellant.

Sanford B. D. Wood, U. S. Atty., and Ed. Towse, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Honolulu, T. H., and H. H. McPike, U. S. Atty., of San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

Before WILBUR and GARRECHT, Circuit Judges.

WILBUR, Circuit Judge.

The Secretary of Labor having issued a warrant of deportation against appellant, appellant petitioned the District Court of the United States for the District of Hawaii for habeas corpus. Upon the return of the writ, the director of immigration reported that he was holding the petitioner on a warrant for deportation.

It appears that appellant was charged with having in his possession 290 grains of smoking opium which had been imported into the United States, and with having in his possession 290 grains of smoking opium in a package to which there was not then and there affixed the tax-paid stamp required by law; that he pleaded guilty to the charge; that the plea was entered in pursuance of an arrangement or stipulation with the United States attorney that the recommendation would be made to the court against the deportation of the prisoner; that such a recommendation was made; that the trial judge sentenced appellant to a term of six months on one count of the indictment, and placed him on probation for a period of three years on the other count; and that the judge of the District Court at the time of imposing sentence recommended and directed in pursuance of 8 USCA § 155, that the petitioner be not deported.

The warrant of deportation was issued notwithstanding the recommendation of the trial judge and notwithstanding the circumstances under which the plea of guilty was entered upon the theory that the statute of 1931 required such deportation and that the provisions of 8 USCA § 155, with relation to the power of the trial court in which the conviction occurred, did not apply to cases in which the alien had been convicted of violating the laws of the United States with relation to opium. Act Feb. 18, 1931, 8 USCA § 156a. A similar question arose under the Act of May 26, 1922 (21 USCA § 175). This court held that under this latter act the provisions of 8 USCA § 155, concerning the recommendation of the trial judge, were applicable to such cases. Hampton v. Wong Ging (C. C. A.) 299 F. 289; Weedin v. Moy Fat (C. C. A.) 8 F.(2d) 488; Chung Que Fond v. Nagle (C. C. A.) 15 F.(2d) 789. It was held in these cases that the direction in 21 USCA § 175, that the alien "be taken into custody and deported in accordance with the provisions of sections 155 and 156 of Title 8 or provisions of law hereafter enacted which are amendatory of or in substitution for such sections," in effect incorporated into the act the provisions of section 155 in regard to the sentence of the alien for crime and the direction of the judge in connection therewith, as follows: "The provision of this section respecting the deportation of aliens convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude shall not apply to one who has been pardoned, nor shall such deportation be made or directed if the court, or judge thereof, sentencing such alien for such crime shall, at the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 practice notes
  • Padilla v. Ky., No. 08-651
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 31, 2010
    ...See ibid. (recognizing that until 1952 a JRAD in a narcotics case "was effective to prevent deportation" (citing Dang Nam v. Bryan, 74 F.2d 379, 380-381 (CA9 1934))). In light of both the steady expansion of deportable offenses and the significant ameliorative effect of a JRAD, it is unsurp......
  • Padilla v. Kentuchy, No. 08–651.
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 31, 2010
    ...(recognizing that until 1952 a JRAD in a narcotics 559 U.S. 363 case “was effective to prevent deportation” (citing Dang Nam v. Bryan, 74 F.2d 379, 380–381 (C.A.9 1934))).In light of both the steady expansion of deportable offenses and the significant ameliorative effect of a JRAD, it is un......
  • Padilla v. Kentucky, No. 08-651.
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • October 13, 2009
    ...See ibid. (recognizing that until 1952 a JRAD in a narcotics case "was effective to prevent deportation" (citing Dang Nam v. Bryan, 74 F.2d 379, 380-381 (C.A.9 In light of both the steady expansion of deportable offenses and the significant ameliorative effect of a JRAD, it is unsurprising ......
  • In re Khourn, Interim Decision No. 3330.
    • United States
    • U.S. DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals
    • October 31, 1997
    ...in narcotic drugs under 21 U.S.C. § 174 (1940) was eligible for a judicial recommendation against deportation. See also Dang Nam v. Bryan, 74 F.2d 379 (9th Cir. 1934) (upholding [21 I&N Dec. 1048 recommendation against deportation for possession of imported smoking opium, a crime involving ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • Padilla v. Ky., No. 08-651
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 31, 2010
    ...See ibid. (recognizing that until 1952 a JRAD in a narcotics case "was effective to prevent deportation" (citing Dang Nam v. Bryan, 74 F.2d 379, 380-381 (CA9 1934))). In light of both the steady expansion of deportable offenses and the significant ameliorative effect of a JRAD, it is unsurp......
  • Padilla v. Kentuchy, No. 08–651.
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • March 31, 2010
    ...(recognizing that until 1952 a JRAD in a narcotics 559 U.S. 363 case “was effective to prevent deportation” (citing Dang Nam v. Bryan, 74 F.2d 379, 380–381 (C.A.9 1934))).In light of both the steady expansion of deportable offenses and the significant ameliorative effect of a JRAD, it is un......
  • Padilla v. Kentucky, No. 08-651.
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • October 13, 2009
    ...See ibid. (recognizing that until 1952 a JRAD in a narcotics case "was effective to prevent deportation" (citing Dang Nam v. Bryan, 74 F.2d 379, 380-381 (C.A.9 In light of both the steady expansion of deportable offenses and the significant ameliorative effect of a JRAD, it is unsurprising ......
  • In re Khourn, Interim Decision No. 3330.
    • United States
    • U.S. DOJ Board of Immigration Appeals
    • October 31, 1997
    ...in narcotic drugs under 21 U.S.C. § 174 (1940) was eligible for a judicial recommendation against deportation. See also Dang Nam v. Bryan, 74 F.2d 379 (9th Cir. 1934) (upholding [21 I&N Dec. 1048 recommendation against deportation for possession of imported smoking opium, a crime involving ......
  • 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