Rosales-Caballero v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv.
| Citation | 472 F.2d 1158 |
| Decision Date | 26 January 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 72-2229.,72-2229. |
| Parties | Israel ROSALES-CABALLERO, Petitioner, v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
Denise David Schwartzman, Legal Services of Greater Miami, Inc., Miami, Fla., for petitioner.
Richard G. Kleindienst, U. S. Atty. Gen., U. S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., Troy A. Adams, Jr., Dist. Director, I. N. S., New Orleans, La., Robert W. Rust, U. S. Atty., Robert L. Woytych, Dist. Director, I. N. S., Miami, Fla., John L. Murphy, Donald H. Feige, Dept. of Justice, Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before RIVES, THORNBERRY and GOLDBERG, Circuit Judges.
This petition for review under section 106 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1105a, seeks to raise the issue whether an indigent alien has a constitutional right to counsel in a deportation proceeding. Two separate sections of the Act, sections 242(b)(2) and 292, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(b) and 1362, contain an identical provision that an alien in a deportation proceeding "shall have the privilege of being represented (at no expense to the Government) by such counsel, authorized to practice in such proceedings, as he shall choose." Those sections are implemented by regulations which require the Special Inquiry Officer, at the opening of a deportation hearing, to advise the alien of his right to representation by counsel at no expense to the Government. 8 C.F.R. 242.16(a) and (d). No provision is contained in the Act or the Regulations for an indigent alien in a deportation proceeding to be assigned counsel at government expense.
The order to show cause served on Rosales advised him that, "If you choose, you may be represented in this proceeding, at no expense to the Government, by an attorney * * *." After engaging an attorney Rosales, at the hearing on December 21, 1971, proceeded without counsel as shown by the following colloquy:
(Emphasis added.) Record, pp. 11, 12.
The only indication of petitioner's indigency is that furnished by the part of the foregoing colloquy which we have emphasized. That is not sufficient proof of indigency to permit us to decide the "* * * momentous issue—the right of an indigent alien to counsel in a deportation proceeding." Hendriques v. Immigration & Nat. Serv., 2nd Cir. 1972, 465 F.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. v. Gasca-Kraft
...District Director, 426 F.2d 894 (9th Cir. 1970); Murgia-Melendrez v. INS, 407 F.2d 207 (9th Cir. 1960). See, also, Rosales-Caballero v. INS, 472 F.2d 1158 (5th Cir. 1973); Henriques v. INS, 465 F.2d 119 (2d Cir.) Cert. denied, 410 U.S. 968, 93 S.Ct. 1452, 35 L.Ed.2d 703 (1972); Carbonell v.......
- Grier v. United States, 72-3060.
-
Matter of Gutierrez
...Government has been recently questioned, Aguilera-Enriquez v. INS, 516 F.2d 565 (6 Cir.1975); Barthold v. INS, supra; Rosales — Caballero v. INS, 472 F.2d 1158 (5 Cir.1973); Henriques v. INS, 465 F.2d 119 (2 Cir.1972), we are precluded from entertaining constitutional challenges to the Act ......
-
Villanueva-Jurado v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv.
...raise the question of his right to have counsel appointed for him on the basis of indigency. (See Rosales-Caballero v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 472 F.2d 1158 (5th Cir. 1973).) Moreover, the record in this case convincingly shows that the appointment of an attorney would have ......