PETITION FOR NATURALIZATION OF KOSTAS, 8349.

• Decision Date: 19 December 1958
• Docket Number: No. 8349.,8349.
• Citation: 169 F. Supp. 77
• Parties: Petition for Naturalization of Vasilios KOSTAS.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Delaware

169 F. Supp. 77

Petition for Naturalization of Vasilios KOSTAS.

No. 8349.

United States District Court D. Delaware.

December 19, 1958.

Samuel Handloff, Wilmington, Del., for petitioner.

Herbert M. Levy, U. S. Naturalization Examiner, Philadelphia, Pa., pro se.

LAYTON, District Judge.

Petitioner, a native and citizen of Greece, aged 44 years, was lawfully admitted to permanent residence on March 14, 1953. On July 31, 1956, he filed a petition for naturalization under Section 319(a) (8 U.S.C.A. § 1430(a)) which provides in effect that any such applicant whose spouse is a United States citizen may be naturalized in three, instead of five,¹ years provided that "during the three years immediately preceding the date of filing his petition he has been living in marital union with the citizen spouse, who has been a United States citizen during all of such period * *."

By the provisions of Section 101(f) (8 U.S.C.A. § 1101(f), a person who has given false testimony in order to obtain citizenship shall not be regarded as having good moral character.

In his Form N-400, petitioner stated under oath (1) that his only address since March 1953 was his brother's home at 602 West 31st St., Wilmington, Delaware, (2) that on August 13, 1951, he had married Anne Haley and (3) that he had lived with his wife for the past three years.

In accordance with practice, the Examiner conducted hearings at which testimony was taken. Also a report consisting of an investigation made by a government investigator was admitted into evidence. Upon the strength of the testimony and report the Examiner has recommended that the petitioner not be naturalized because (a) he had not been residing "in marital union" with his wife for a period of three years immediately preceding his petition; and (2) that he has not established that he is a person of good moral character because he gave false testimony in order to obtain citizenship.

From a reading of Section 319 (a), it was evidently the Congressional expectation that a non-citizen spouse who lived in close association with a citizen spouse for three years would more speedily absorb the basic concepts of citizenship than one not so situated. Accordingly, for such person the waiting period for filing a petition for naturalization is reduced from five to three years. Plainly, then, the words "in marital union with the citizen spouse" appearing in Section 319(a) should be given a reasonably strict construction in order that the section should lead to an accomplishment of the desired objective. And while a short period of separation such as two weeks should not operate to destroy a petitioner's rights under the section, Petition of Omar, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 151 F.Supp. 763, a close continued marital association is obviously intended.

Further discussion is unnecessary for under the facts here, by no stretch of the imagination can this petitioner meet the requirements of the section. It is altogether clear that this was an uneasy union marked by frequent separations of substantial duration to the extent that it is questionable whether the two spent as much as one entire year together from 1953 to 1956. And this conclusion can be readily arrived at from the testimony of the petitioner's own family, including his wife, without recourse to the rather damning contents of the investigation above mentioned.

It is my conclusion that the Examiner's objection to the petitioner's naturalization based upon the provisions of Section 319(a) are well taken and should be sustained.

But whether petitioner should be condemned as a person of bad moral character is again another matter. Certainly, the accusation that he gave false testimony is not entirely without foundation. The City Directory for 1955...