Kielema v. Crossman, 8963.
| Decision Date | 21 April 1939 |
| Docket Number | No. 8963.,8963. |
| Citation | 103 F.2d 292 |
| Parties | KIELEMA v. CROSSMAN, Immigration Inspector. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Arthur J. Mandell, of Houston, Tex., for appellant.
Douglas W. McGregor, U. S. Atty., and Brian S. Odem, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Houston, Tex., for appellee.
Before FOSTER, HUTCHESON, and McCORD, Circuit Judges.
Mees Kielema, an alien, was arrested and taken into custody by the United States Immigration Inspector at Houston, Texas, on August 24, 1936. After a prolonged hearing the Assistant Secretary of Labor issued a warrant on January 14, 1938, directing the deportation of Kielema to The Netherlands. On April 11, 1938, Kielema petitioned the District Court for a writ of habeas corpus. The court discharged the writ on April 20, 1938, and remanded Kielema to the custody of the Immigration Inspector for deportation. From the order of dismissal Kielema has taken this appeal.
Following his arrest Kielema was advised that he was to be accorded a hearing and the warrant of arrest was read and explained to him. The warrant charged that in violation of 8 U.S.C.A. § 155.
Kielema was advised that he had the right to be represented by counsel. Thereupon, he was immediately released and his hearing set for August 25, 1936. He employed counsel and they appeared at the hearing. At the request of his newly acquired counsel the hearing was again continued. When the case was resumed on September 3, 1936, the charges were again explained to the alien in the presence of his counsel and the evidence was presented upon which the warrant of arrest was issued. This evidence consisted of the sworn statements of Grace Joliff Roberson and Thelma Parker. The Immigration Inspector produced the witnesses who had made the ex parte affidavits. These witnesses identified their respective statements and were then fully cross-examined by appellant's counsel. Kielema was given the opportunity to produce evidence and witnesses in his own behalf which he did.
Kielema contends that he was not given a fair hearing before the immigration authorities. He attacks the ex parte statements of the witnesses and asserts that there was no substantial evidence to support the warrant of deportation.
In a deportation proceeding the alien must be accorded a fair hearing. To render a hearing unfair, the defect or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marcello v. Ahrens, 14718.
...137, 141, and cases cited, affirmed 342 U.S. 580, 72 S.Ct. 512, 96 L.Ed. 586; Belizaro v. Zimmerman, 3 Cir., 200 F.2d 282; Kielema v. Crossman, 5 Cir., 103 F.2d 292; Hays v. Hatges, 8 Cir., 94 F.2d 67; Hays v. Zahariades, 8 Cir., 90 F.2d 3; Reynolds v. United States ex rel. Dean, 7 Cir., 68......
-
Yiannopoulos v. Robinson
...finding is lacking, or error of law has been committed or the evidence reflects manifest abuse of discretion." See also Kielema v. Crossman, 5 Cir., 103 F.2d 292. In considering specifically, plaintiff's averments that a mass of incompetent and irrelevant testimony was introduced over prope......
-
Moncado v. Ramsey, 13670.
...264 U.S. 131, 44 S.Ct. 260, 68 L.Ed. 590; Nicoli v. Briggs, 10 Cir., 83 F.2d 375; Hays v. Zahariades, 8 Cir., 90 F.2d 3; Kielema v. Crossman, 5 Cir., 103 F.2d 292; Bufalino v. Irvine, 10 Cir., 103 F.2d 830; United States ex rel. Karpathiou v. Schlotfeldt, 7 Cir., 106 F.2d 928; United States......
-
Petition of Pazakos
...cases cited affirmed 1952, 342 U.S. 580, 72 S.Ct. 512, 96 L.Ed. 586; Belizaro v. Zimmerman, 3 Cir., 1952, 200 F.2d 282; Kielema v. Crossman, 5 Cir., 1939, 103 F.2d 292; Hays v. Hatges, 8 Cir., 1938, 94 F.2d 67; Hays v. Zahariades, 8 Cir., 1937, 90 F.2d 3; Reynolds v. United States ex rel. D......