Hiroichi v. Brownell, 12894.
Decision Date | 28 June 1956 |
Docket Number | No. 12894.,12894. |
Parties | HIROICHI and Tsugino HAMASAKI, Appellants, v. Herbert BROWNELL, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — District of Columbia Circuit |
Mr. David Carliner, Washington, D. C., with whom Messrs, Jack Wasserman and Edward J. Ennis, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellants.
Mr. John W. Kern, III, Asst. U. S. Atty. for appellee. Messrs. Leo A. Rover, U. S. Atty. at the time record was filed, Lewis Carroll, Robert L. Toomey and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Attys., were on the brief for appellee. Mr. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., also entered an appearance for appellee.
Before WASHINGTON, DANAHER and BASTIAN, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court dismissing appellants' (plaintiffs') complaint. Appellants, husband and wife, are natives of Japan who, without visas, last entered the United States in April of 1929. The Board of Immigration Appeals, in its order dated January 9, 1953, directed that appellants depart from this country voluntarily without expense to the Government and that, if they did not so depart, the privilege of voluntary departure shall be withdrawn and appellants deported pursuant to law.
The complaint in the District Court attacks the action of the Attorney General in denying suspension of deportation. As disclosed by the pre-trial memorandum, appellants contend that the order of deportation is null and void upon the grounds (1) that their deportation is arbitrary and an abuse of discretion, considering their good moral character, their residence here of twenty-five years, and the fact that they have five American-born children; and (2) that their deportation hearing was unfair by reason of the consideration given to confidential information.
The record herein indicates that the deportation proceedings were commenced on May 16, 1945. Hearings were resumed on September 29, 1949. The delay was due, in part, to the extensive investigation by the Government which eventually disclosed perjured testimony given by the appellants during the first hearings. This perjury, which was not denied by appellants, was committed during the hearing on May 16, 1945, before the Immigration and Naturalization Service. The Hearing Officer, finding that appellants had not been persons of good moral character, due to false statements made by them concerning their true identities, ruled that appellants were subject to deportation on the grounds that they are aliens ineligible for citizenship and not entitled to enter the United States, and, further, that they are ineligible for suspension of deportation.
An appeal was taken and, on April 16, 1951, the Acting Assistant Commissioner, Adjudications Division, ordered that appellants' applications for suspension of deportation be denied, and stated:
Thereafter, on October 15, 1951, in denying...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Petition of Moy Wing Yin
...note 3 supra. 13 Cf. Tandaric v. Robinson, supra; Alexiou v. Rogers, 1958, 103 U.S.App.D.C. 79, 254 F.2d 782; Hiroichi Hamasaki v. Brownell, 1956, 98 U.S.App.D.C. 309, 235 F.2d 536. 14 See "Whom We Shall Welcome", Report of the President's Commission on Immigration and Naturalization, pp. 1......
- Boudin v. Dulles, 13130